A parasite resulting from society's outdated patent laws, with a simple fix.
1. Only make practicing entities eligible for IP damages.
2. Reduce the duration of all patents by 50%.
1. Only make practicing entities eligible for IP damages.
2. Reduce the duration of all patents by 50%.
When the 13th amendment was passed slave owners didn't get to "grandfather in" their existing slaves. Extreme example, but the point is sometimes old laws are so harmful to society we should not allow people to continue abusing them.
I mentioned in another comment about the Eastern District of Texas which became effectively a giant grift operation (though a recent SC case should put a damper on it). Plaintiffs sought it because they knew the jury pool would also be people who benefit from this extraordinarily corrupt, banana republic extortion racket. It was effectively like a forgettable little drive-through town that setup speed traps and decided to fund the municipality on the backs of outsiders.
There are some people who would counter this. For instance one paper notes that of jury trials, 73% of East Texas cases choose for the plaintiff, versus 68% elsewhere, "proving" that it isn't that much of a difference. The problem with this reasoning, however, is that East Texas was specifically where the cases with no merit went. It was overloaded with patent trolls and NPEs.
Actual, credible cases were seldom tried in East Texas.
Every judgment of that district should be vacated.
Pretty ridiculous how the most benign of terms all become slurs in the woke era.
Now you're in the same situation, but you sell your patent to another entity because you can't afford yourself to sue the big boys for damage. You or anyone else you delegate should have no recourse at all?
Ideas are a dime a dozen. Execution is what matters. IP has value and should be incentivized, but right now, the legal system weighs the legal application for an idea far too heavily, and so alas, patent trolls exist.
Imagine a startup trying to develop a very expensive solid state LIDAR. They don't have the millions in funds to go to a fab and go into production. They do shitty prototypes. But they get some attention and are able to sell/license their patents. In this alternative universe where patent law is much weaker:
1. The big corp can choose to ignore you and not buy or license the patents. Their defense will be that you are a non-practising entity since you have no revenues or customers. There is a grace period? They make the bet that they can just wait you out.
2. You never patent the idea in the first place. There is no point as there is no way for you to profit from the idea. The world never get access to the tech.
If they can't find anyone to invest in them, are they the ones to execute the idea? Btw, they could sell patents to practicing entities (those who immediately choose to become practicing entities of the patent) and still get compensation for their IP.
And your scenario does not exist, frankly, where someone comes up with an idea so unique and groundbreaking, that it isn't rediscovered for longer than the duration of a typical patent term. You have a couple years, tops. In fact, someone has probably already come up with the idea and you never heard of it. Execution is what matters.
Change always affects someone negatively, but I don't find your examples compelling. Patent trolls and lawyers are the real losers in this scenario, which is fine, because they are currently a net tax on value creation in the IP space.