Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Patent Trolls Target Small East Texas Companies

Posted by kdawson on from the patently-absurd dept.

An anonymous reader writes "In a sign that patent trolls are getting desperate to keep their cases in East Texas — long known as the friendliest venue for their claims — some have taken to suing tiny, no-name companies that are run by East Texas residents. The hope is that, if at least one defendant is located in East Texas, the judge will keep the entire case there. Nate Neel, a Longview, Texas resident with a small open source software company called CitiWare, was sued by Bedrock Computer Technologies in June despite (he claims) having no customers or other meaningful operations of any kind. In response, Mr. Neel has posted a strongly worded letter to Bedrock's attorneys on his Web site. It will be interesting to see how East Texas judges respond to this abuse of process perpetrated against their own residents."

28 of 281 comments (clear)

  1. Strongly worded letter? by TubeSteak · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm going to go ahead and point out that repeatedly dropping the F-bomb is not "strongly worded" it is "unprofessional".
    Not to mention the lack of spell check.

    It sucks what's being done to the guy, but a little professionalism goes a long way.
    And like anything else on the internet, his poorly spelled "FUCK YOU" is always going to be associated with his name.

    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
    1. Re:Strongly worded letter? by amiga3D · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Heh...well maybe that's why he's not in business anymore. I think maybe they pissed him off. Sooner or later if these trolls keep suing everyday people they're going to run across one that's not wrapped too tight. It's only a matter of time before someone shows up at one of these lawyer's offices with a pump shotgun and sprays the place down. Keep fucking with everybody and the odds go up.

    2. Re:Strongly worded letter? by hackus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well I disagree here.

      Professionalism means conduct in exchange for service or work completed.

      All he got in the mail was a lawsuit notice.

      Professionalism has nothing to do about this whole matter.

      Might I point out that the other party of this dispute TRULY DOES lack professionalism as well as ethics.

      Simply because you wrap it all up in nice grammar, letterhead and mail it to someone does not make it professional or ethical.

      -Hack

      --
      Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
    3. Re:Strongly worded letter? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      there comes a point where you just have to tell someone to go fuck themselves. no amount of chivalry would change anything in a case such as this.

    4. Re:Strongly worded letter? by ari_j · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The other part of the story is that his letter is going to end up in front of the federal judge. He might be entitled to sanctions to compensate him for the wasted time and expense in responding to a lawsuit that was brought against him with no basis in reality, but federal judges tend to disdain juvenile responses to serious matters. Like many things in life, there is a right way and a wrong way to respond to a ridiculous lawsuit - this guy chose the wrong way and it will most likely end up costing him.

    5. Re:Strongly worded letter? by orsty3001 · · Score: 3, Funny

      I miss spelled fuck you onetime and never to this day have been able to live it down. You'd never guess there would be so many grammar Nazis in Sunday School.

    6. Re:Strongly worded letter? by ari_j · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Precisely. I am a connoisseur of strongly-worded letters, and his is not one. A strongly-worded letter strikes fear into the heart of the recipient using only on-topic attacks of the recipient's argument itself. Ad hominem attacks always have the effect of derogating your own position by the implied concession that your opponent's argument is too iron-clad for you to respond to it directly. There is a time and place for ad hominem attacks, but at least spell them right.

      Picture yourself as the judge. There are two people in front of you, neither of whom you have met. One of them says, "He infringed my patent by operating a business that manufactured millions of units of products utilizing the claimed technique." The other one only says, "Fuck you, slim[e]!" Right off the bat, you are going to be biased against the guy who can't be bothered to explain why he didn't infringe the patent. He just looks like a puerile, sophomoric idiot.

      Now, try it again. This time, however, the second guy says, "The suggestion that I infringed his patent is almost too absurd to form a response. Not only was I never in a manufacturing business, but no activity I have ever undertaken has utilized the technique claimed in the patent. Even the slightest bit of factual research could have reached that conclusion prior to bringing this lawsuit against me." Now, the first guy is the one who looks like a lazy buffoon.

      And that's how you word things strongly. And, if you really want to have some fun, use the puntacular phrase "patently ridiculous." Judges love puns!*

      * - Well, not really. Some do, but only if you use them judiciously.

    7. Re:Strongly worded letter? by ari_j · · Score: 5, Funny

      I am a connoisseur of strongly-worded letters

      In other words, a frequent usenet user.

      No, nothing nearly so respectable. I'm an attorney.

    8. Re:Strongly worded letter? by ari_j · · Score: 5, Funny

      I actually went to law school because I was sick of people taking 'IANAL' the wrong way.

  2. Dog Food by siloko · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Brings a whole new meaning to the expression 'Eat your own dog food!'. I guess after they have finished consuming their local businesses and the employment rate plummets then maybe the local legislators will think again about supporting this kind of bullshit.

    1. Re:Dog Food by Dachannien · · Score: 4, Informative

      This doesn't really have anything to do with local legislators. Patent disputes are usually handled in US District Court, meaning that the reason why the Eastern District of Texas has been so friendly to patent trolls is because an unusual number of federal judges in that district are unusually biased in favor of plaintiffs in patent disputes.

    2. Re:Dog Food by xgr3gx · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I guess I don't get the whole thing with filing patent cases in East Texas.
      A poster a few comments above said Federal Judges in E. Texas seem to favor patent plaintiffs.
      Seems odd - somebody has got to be seeding the panel of judges, and it has to be for the purpose of making money on patent law suits.
      It wouldn't shock me if some law firm was giving huge election contributions to biased politicians to get these biased judged appointed.
      Follow the money - and you'll probably find out why E. Texas is how it is in regards to patent law.

      --
      Shameless plug alert: Game server control panel
    3. Re:Dog Food by ari_j · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I wouldn't worry about it too much. This entire comment thread is based on patently false notions of the legal system underlying this situation. First you have the suggestion that local legislators are in favor of patent troll lawsuits. Then, when that's explained to be wrong, you have the suggestion that 'East Texas laws' (whatever those are - East Texas is not its own legislative jurisdiction with its own laws, it's just a federally-created judicial district for the federal courts) should be changed to stop this from happening. I hesitate to imagine what ridiculous idea is going to come up in response to your correction. We can only hope that it's a Godwin-approved car analogy.

    4. Re:Dog Food by Dachannien · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There are dozens of districts in the federal court system. Just by random chance, it's fairly likely that at least one of them will be off to the side of the bell curve, and once patent plaintiffs noticed which one(s), they started trying to take advantage of it.

  3. Re:Interesting defense by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I didn't realize that "I dun have no cuzmers" was a valid defense against patent violations.

    That's not all of his argument. Although his letter is unprofessional and poorly organized, he says:

    To Sam Baxter - if you wish to acknowledge my email and realize your mistake on claiming CitiWare in your suit on Bedrocks behalf, then remove any claims against CitiWare / CityWare and I can remove this page and any publicity about filling an invalid lawsuit against a company that never used your patent or for that matter even developed any product sold or used (CityWare only used Open Source code under GPL for personal projects or other employers)!

    He's probably flabbergasted that they didn't do any development, they just repackaged/administered GPL licensed open source products and now find themselves the target of a lawsuit. And like the article says, they don't care about him or what he says or the validity of targeting him, they care about keeping the case in East Texas District Court.

    This guy doesn't need a defense, he just needs to reside in East Texas and he's part of this case no matter how ill placed the blame is.

    --
    My work here is dung.
  4. Amazing patent by paulhar · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Having just read the patent claims it seems that this patent is on the ability for a linked list to be cleared of expired items. Truly a ground breaking, patent worthy invention!

    1. Re:Amazing patent by Drakkenmensch · · Score: 5, Funny

      Your comment just violated my sarcasm patent for "making a comment worded in such a way that it sounds positive while still carrying an implied negative meaning opposite of the actual wording used."

  5. Re:Interesting defense by jtev · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, if he didn't sell anything, or otherwise distribute anything to anyone then there can be no harm to the patent holder. That means that it is not worth their wile for them to sue him.

    --
    That which is done from love exists beyond good and evil
  6. And what Bedrock is doing *IS* professional?? by Viol8 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why respond professionally to something that is clearly a scam? He's not the CEO of Google with shareholders to worry about FFS, he's just some guy who had a little company and closed it down and is now doing a day job. So he said "fuck". Well stop the press!

    1. Re:And what Bedrock is doing *IS* professional?? by SpacePunk · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They are lawyers, it's a given that they are crooks.

      --
      Steve's Computer Service, Hobbs, NM
    2. Re:And what Bedrock is doing *IS* professional?? by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They are lawyers, it's a given that they are crooks.

      All lawyers are crooks except the one trying to help you out of your mess!

    3. Re:And what Bedrock is doing *IS* professional?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No, that one's a crook too, but when there's a metaphorical gun to your head, you'll pay just about anyone to make the situation go away. If the nation's laws weren't so twisted and byzantine, people could realistically self-represent in court.

  7. Re:Texas by robot_love · · Score: 4, Funny

    I feel obligated to say that, while I have seen repeated admonitions not to "mess" with that particular state, hating it should be fine.

    --
    .there is enough of everything for everyone.
  8. Re:Interesting defense by The+Ultimate+Fartkno · · Score: 4, Funny

    Maybe he's a coyote.

  9. turn it around... by nycguy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Should the FSF open an office in East Texas and launch lawsuits for violating the GPL from there?

  10. Re:Interesting defense by Em+Emalb · · Score: 5, Funny

    The Most Litigating Man in the World:

    "I don't always sue people for patent violations, but when I do, I sue in East Texas. Stay classy my friends."

    --
    Sent from your iPad.
  11. Re:Referer protection by tepples · · Score: 3, Informative

    The Parking Lot is Full, Dec 04

    There are like, 54 different comics on that page. Which one is the relevant one?

    That's why I said "Dec 04" in my citation.

    Why should a website be so poorly structured as to not have any direct links to single comics?

    Likely because people have been embedding single comics in forum posts and running up the (self-)publisher's bandwidth bill.

  12. East Texas troll friendliness is well known by erroneus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I was reading about how Bilski is threatening software patents and how some sides are saying "It ain't over yet!" and are interpreting the interest taken by the supreme court as intent to overturn the Bilski decision. On the other hand, at least one supreme court justice is well aware of the questionable nature of the East Texas court and has expressed dislike for it. From that I can see that perhaps the SCOTUS would like to finally reign in the lower courts and the abuse that is propagated by the East Texas court.

    I believe the Bilski decision represents a restoration of sanity to patent law and process as I am sure that others here will agree. When it comes to technology, interoperability and compatibility are absolutely critical to growth and development of new technology as increasingly one thing builds on another very rapidly. To patent software literally and directly imposes roadblocks, or more exactly, private toll blocks on technological progress. One could even argue that without reigning in such practices, the U.S. will be giving up its position of technological superiority because of such abusive greed.