Hacker News Reader

Comment by nicholassmith | Hacker News Reader

I wouldn't have called this as patent abuse, he came up with a neat idea, and applied for a patent. He didn't use it, but that doesn't invalidate that he came up with the idea, he just moved on. He hasn't sold it to anyone, he's never used it aggressively. He's being a dick now and saying "I might have to sue you!", but it's not patent abuse in the way Intellectual Ventures approaches it.

Edit; Actually, I don't think it's patent abuse as much as it is good old fashioned extortion.

View on HN

> I don't think it's patent abuse as much as it is good old fashioned extortion.

Precisely. Large companies routinely employ such negotiation, as does the US gov't to an extreme. Kim Dotcom is no worse.

But then, he isn't any better for it, either. This is patent trolling, plain and simple - I don't see why people are rallying around him in this.

Maybe for the same reason the masses rally around companies and gov'ts that do it.

Because he is The Little Guy, and there is a massive and highly publicized campaign by the US government against him. This is him doing what he can to fight back.

I think it says something that he never did anything with the patent until now, I believe that he has good intentions and no desire to be a patent troll. Given his unique situation, and his flair for drama and unorthodoxy, I think it makes perfect sense.

Yes, let's attempt to extort defense funds from large corporations. That will surely get them on his side.

Just because he's "The Little Guy" doesn't make it any better. Holding someone hostage to raise money for a cancer research foundation wouldn't make the act itself morally justified.

Excoriate Kim Dotcom but to avoid being hypocritical make sure you do likewise for those large corporations who perfected his method.

Flip it around, and that's where I'm at. Condemn the companies that the tactic is most associated with; don't excuse Kim Dotcom for doing it, too.

Not just this tactic but way worse too. Mass pollution, tax dodging, promoting war for profit, etc. Kim Dotcom is like Mother Teresa comparatively.

Well, yeah. But that doesn't make the tactics he's using here any less bad (in my book).

Well, I don't know what to say, I think we have basic ideological differences. I think every situation is unique and needs to be judged in full context, you seem to have a more rigid moral code. If that act actually moved the needle on cancer knowledge, I might support it.

This particular situation appeals to my romantic and absurdist philosophies, it's ballsy and interesting if nothing else.

In my opinion, it damages the arguments against such abuses of the patent system. A public outpouring of support for this case makes it seem like there's a double standard: that people oppose it in the typical context because of a general bias against large corporations, rather than a problem with patent trolling itself.

Well sure. I doubt Kim lobbied for software patents.

I oppose the use of land-mines in general but I support their placement in the boardrooms of corporations that manufacture them. Because heartless execs are nothing like innocent children. Context matters.

> Actually, I don't think it's patent abuse as much as it is good old fashioned extortion.

Seems to me that that's like saying "I don't think its criminal homicide so much as it is good old fashioned murder." Using patents to facilitate extortion is the main form of abuse that the phrase "patent abuse" is used to refer to.

Patents aren't supposed to protect ideas.

It's a process, which is patentable.

In the US and virtually only the US.

No other country matters, according to the US. If a company in another country does business in the US it can be sued in Eastern Texas (patent trolls' heaven).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com