Slashdot Mirror


Supreme Court Clears Patent Invalidity Suits

The Empiricist writes "The United States Supreme Court has cleared the way for entities to sue over the validity of a patent — even while paying user fees to the patent holder. The eight-to-one Medimmune v. Genetech decision, written by Justice Scalia, held that by paying royalties to a patent holder, one does not necessarily waive the right to challenge the validity of the patent."

3 of 120 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Good by s20451 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    yet we hardly see anyone but patent trolls and megacorps doing anything with patents, so anything which weakens them is for the best.

    That's because patents only make the news when you get sued. I take it that you are not an inventor. Much of the value of a startup technology company is contained in its patent portfolio, and that portfolio is what makes it attractive for purchase by larger companies.

    If you're just a lone inventor and you have that good an idea, you're probably better off making a prototype and marketing the idea directly, anyhow, rather than getting patents.

    There's no reason why you can't do both. In fact, if you don't do both, you're an idiot who is taking unnecessary risks on behalf of your investors.

    --
    Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
  2. Applicable to SCO? by Tmack · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I wonder if this would open the flood gates to all those that purchased the "Linux license" from SCO (for the low low introductory price of $900) to sue SCO for return of their fee once these last death throws in court are over with, if theres anything left of SCO? Basically the license was to cover royalties on the patents that Linux supposedly infringed that SCO "owned", and as these patents and other IP that SCO claims to own and claims is in Linux are being laughed out of court I would think this would make reclaiming the fee from SCO easier..

    tm

    --
    Support TBI Research: http://www.raisinhope.org
  3. Re:Good by Omnifarious · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I suspect that this is an error, and that the real value lies in the expertise and ability of the lone inventor or small company to create the technology in question. It's really interesting how business shies away from valuing people and expertise over some sort of even very nebulous, intangible and somewhat imaginary asset. I think there are some powerful blinders in operation somewhere.