Patent Troll Loses; Has to Pay

A scam's a scam, no matter how high tech or how much you dress it up.

At least with patent scams if you call the troll's bluff. They have to put up or shut up and lose their most valuable weapon - that of anonymity.

It isn't as common to fight back (especially if you don't know who the scammer is), but it happens. http://www.wired.com/2014/05/dfwtbj/.

It's hard to see it as a victory for anybody but the lawyers. The ceo had a million to back up his lawsuit.. how nice for him, but that's money he shouldn't have to use on baseless lawyering. The trolls shouldn't be able to get that ball rolling. The criminal justice system allows justice for for the criminals.

Victim: "I have a patent Troll that demand $50,000.00 or they will take me to court......"

Attorney, "Just pay him, it will be a lot Cheaper instead of having a long, expensive, drawn out court case."

Victim: "But it's all BS."

Attorney: "It's just too difficult to fight. These trolls are just POS low lifes looking to make a quick and easy buck"

Victim" "OK"

Attorney: "That will be $2500.00 please"

Victim: "For what?"

Attorney: "Why legal consultation of course."

Granting that the troll shouldn't even FEEL like he has a leg to stand on, past law has been the cause of the current situation, in which a deep-pockets and somewhat unscrupulous company can take advantage of the economic weakness of the little guy, because the deep-pockets can buy a lawyer up front, and the little guy can't afford a lawyer at all.

This changes the game, in that lawyers who know the patent law game will now be much more likely to take on a client on a contingency basis (the lawyer gets paid IF he wins, and according to the amount the court awards, but gets nothing, or a severely reduced payment, if he loses) and the ability of the deep pockets guy to win on a threat (Say what? I can't afford to fight, but I can afford to pay up to get him off my back.) is limited, since this precedent makes it more likely that his threat will be called for the bluff it is, and he'll wind up paying double costs for wasting the court's time.

Win both ways, because fewer of these cases will be brought in the first place, and fewer payments to the patent trolls will result in the whole process not being worth it.

It should never have come to this, but at least this is one court that is moving to fix a severely bruised, if not broken, system.

this may bring in more lobbyists from the legal industry to change that.

If I recall, there is a high number of attorneys coming into practice that the industry can support the way it is.

Well, I don't remember who said it, but when it comes to fixing problems of law, it's "first, we shoot all the lawyers".

We have too many, I agree. But we also need law to be spoken in plain english, so that those of us who are NOT lawyers can hold the feet of those who are to the fires of honesty. I know, you are now saying, "Lawyers and honesty in the same sentence? What's he been smoking?", but that is a huge part of the problem, IMHO. Lawyers are NOT held to honesty, and when a lawyer talks about being a sworn officer of the court, I'm sure Policemen must roll their eyes so hard they lock back in their heads.

But the fix for this, as the fix for bad politicians, is for the "Stupid, Uninformed, Ignorant PEOPLE" (for this read, "All those who couldn't afford, nor stomach, law-school and the Good Old Boys at the bar") to stand up and be heard, regardless of the disdain of the entire legal system for the people for whom it works is supposed to work.

The power in America, according to our Constitution, resides with the People, after all. NOT with the lawyers and politicians.

Who said it......... Shakespeare I believe..... and I agree.

And as for as law to spoken in plain English......... there is a reason what they use Latin, and that is that it's a dead language........ while English meaning of words evolves.

By the way, there are good attorneys,......... also.

"By the way, there are good attorneys,......... also."

Some are my friends, and you should hear what THEY say about attorneys!

But, point taken.

I also know some attorneys personally, and when it comes to the public image of layers, they have the following statement:

"99 percent of all attorneys ... give the rest a bad name."

YEP. I've never seen any profession more dedicate to collecting jokes about its own horrid behavior.

Which reminds me of the story one of my friends told about a visitor to Bangkok, who got lost in the markets near a major canal, while shopping.

He had purchased a large bronze rat, and the proprietor had tried to sell him "the story" about the rat, also.

In fact, the rat only cost about 10 Baht, while the story was another 100, and the proprietor was most insistent. The shopper finally escaped with the bronze rat, only to find himself pursued by a vast and increasing sea of live rats.

Panicked, and finding himself trapped on the docks of the canal, he did the only thing he could think of. He flung the bronze rat as far as possible into the Khlong, to see the ocean of live rats that had chased him dive in after it, and drown.

Inspired, he spent another week finding the shop from which he'd bought the rat. The proprietor, delighted to see him return, immediately picked up his refrain, attempting to sell "the story".

The shopper stopped him cold, exclaiming "Forget the blamed story, I want to buy a bronze LAWYER!"

A guy goes into his attorney's office.

Guy, "Can I ask you two questions?"

Lawyer, "Sure. What's the second one?"

Guy, "What?"

Lawyer, "I said, "Sure. What's the second one?' ., that'll be $2500.00"