Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 26th Dec 2008 20:00 UTC
Large multinational software companies like Apple, Microsoft, and Google, rarely - if ever - initiate patent infringement lawsuits against other software companies, probably because they themselves infringe on lots of patents too. However, they do get sued themselves by smaller companies. Even though the Christian part of the world is all about forgiveness and love and pink ponies during the holidays (or, at least, they ought to be), Apple, Google, and Microsoft have been struck by a patent infringement lawsuit started by Cygnus Systems.
Thread beginning with comment 341725
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2008-12-28
It is better if you learn about things before you comment on them. Until the patent issued in 2008, there was no patent. It also takes some time to find a law firm and suing within several months after he patent issues is not unheard of, not illogical, not immoral. For a large case like this, a lot of research is needed and a lot of other work.
And, most importantly, as the current US law seems increasingly partial to the infringer (some of which are indeed "patent pirates"), if a (small) company contacts a potiential infringer for a license, or even just to talk about things, the patentee is likely to be DJ'd (that is: sued) by the patent pirate. Then the company who is using (possibly stole) the technology gets to choose the venue. And, the (small) patent owner will have to defend itself, something costing millions of dollars that the owner might very well not have. And if you don't defend yourself, the patent will most likely be declared invalid. - Not because it deserves to be, but simply because the patent owner does not (cannot afford to) defend himself.
Mabe someone should ask themselves who is at the most disadvantage here, the small, poor patent owner/inventor, or, say, Microsoft, with 40 billion (or whatever it is) in the bank.