Re: [GENERAL] Oracle buys Innobase

On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 12:05 -0700, Chris Travers wrote:

> 5) Independant patent license firms. I guess it is a possibility, but in the end, companies that mostly manufacture lawsuits usually go broke. Why would you sue a non-profit if you were mostly trying to make a buck with the lawsuit?

IANAL, but I think this category would be higher. For the simple reason
that the non-profit might be viewed as low-hanging fruit and easy to
pluck.

Remember, what some of these (a lot?) "patent license firms" (now that's
a lot nicer than what I would have called them) try to do is get easy
targets to license the patent. This makes it easier to get other
companies to license the patent.

Often, the smaller targets will settle and license the patent because
the cost to defend themselves is so high that it is cheaper to pay the
license fees than to fight (this sounds familiar, oh yeah, protection
rackets). These "firms" then use those licensees to legitimize their
patent, claiming others licensing the patent "proves" their patent is
enforceable. Then they target bigger and more lucrative fish.

[My jaded comments aside, I think there is a place for the US patent
system to protect true invention and innovation. It's just been twisted
into something -- well, I don't need to say it, you already know.]