Slashdot Mirror
Nest Labs Calls Honeywell Lawsuit 'Worse Than Patent Troll'
UnknowingFool writes "Over a year ago, Nest Labs launched the Learning Thermostat. The brainchild of Tony Fadell, former head of Apple's iPod and iPhone division, the Learning Thermostat promised a self-programming and wifi-enabled thermostat that would save energy costs. After some glowing reviews, Nest found itself in a patent infringement lawsuit against Honeywell. Nest responded with multiple claims calling Honeywell 'worse than a patent troll.' Among Nest's claims: Honeywell hid prior art (some on some previous patents that they owned) and inapplicable patents (patent on mechanical potentiometer when Nest's product does not include one). Nest's stance is that Honeywell filed the lawsuits not to extract money but to set back progress so that they can control the industry."
So how do you feel about companies re-applying for a patent that they already received after the original patent has expired as a way of restricting competition?
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
I've been thinking about replacing my home Honeywell thermostats (2) with Nests so that I can link, control, and monitor them more effectively. The news of this lawsuit has pretty much sold the deal.
I don't think Honeywell thought about the Streisand effect.
In context, I have always seen patent trolls portrayed as non-practicing entities- do nothing companies that sit on and exploit patents for monetary gain. While we can argue that Honeywell is cynically exploiting its patents for monetary gain, it's certainly not a non-practicing entity. They're a huge manufacturer, a leader in their field. They just happen to be using any means to help protect their market share.
There's your answer. The rest is for the judge to decide. If you ask me about my personal opinion, it's very damning and pretty much in line with what Honeywell is known for. However, I'm not the one making the decision here.
Well, the problem is that they don't really hold legitimate patents as much as they held legitimate patents. Those patents expired some time ago, and as Honeywell hasn't actually innovated in the thermostat space in the last 40 years or so, they didn't really have any new patents to file. So, it seems they just went out and filed essentially the same patents again, using sufficiently different language that nobody really noticed, giving them new "valid" patents. Unfortunately, this practice is of dubious legality to say the least.
Right, but you're missing the point: A patent troll wouldn't try to stop this product, they'd just want a cut. Honeywell wants to eliminate this product even though they don't have a product as advanced. Therefore if you value progress, you'd be better of if these patents were owned by patent trolls. That Honeywell makes less advanced competing products may help people justify the validity of these patents more, but in the end the consumer will be worse off with the patents in the hands of Honeywell than in the hands of do-nothing trolls, because do-nothings trolls will let other people do-something and Honeywell will not.
(I never thought I'd argue on the side of patent trolls, but this is mainly just an intellectual exercise anyway. I doubt any of these patents are justifiable as "promoting science and the useful arts", in that the technology would be created even if the patents were never expected or granted.)
Some friends installed a Nest recently and had issues. They spent an evening repeating the installation steps trying to understand what they did wrong and another evening on the phone with support, being told to repeat those steps again. Eventually they were told that their furnace didn't output enough power for the Nest thermostat and that they'd have to return the unit (to Amazon, I think) for a refund and pick some other thermostat brand.
They called up my dad the EE, who has no real thermostat or HVAC expertise but did install a new thermostat himself 20 years back. They described the error shown by the thermostat and their conversation with Nest support and he pointed out that "enough power" isn't a really relevant concept. He went over and tested the voltages on the well documented furnace connections and then on the relatively poorly documented Nest thermostat and found that the fault was with Nest. He called Nest support again and was told for half an hour that he was mistaken, then asked for a manager and convinced him that the problem was with their product, not the furnace. Once a warranty replacement arrived the problem was immediately solved.
It's just an anecdote, but it was impressive how much Nest support resisted and that the first unit arrived with a hardware problem. It made me wary of the company. Furthermore, the "learning" capabilities have been an utter failure for said friends. I think the current Nest thermostat is only meant to work for much more predictable people.
"I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
Honeywell can easily take the position that the patents in question are not prior art (different subject matter) and thus don't need to be disclosed.
If you look at the claims it is not at all convincing that they are prior art. In some cases some the of patents Nest is claiming were hidden from the USPTO are actually cited in the patents that Honeywell is claiming are infringed on (OOPS).
This one is also covered by a previous patent that Honeywell owns. It's the patent for the Magic-Stat. It was developed by an inventor in Ann Arbor, Michigan back in the 70's or 80's. Honeywell bought that patent years ago. I knew someone who knew the inventor, and had one myself. That was it's big claim to fame - the thermostat "learns" your space's thermal inertia so as to achieve the desired temperature at the desired time. It also had the same schedule learning concept i.e. just jump up and adjust the thermostat when you feel uncomfortable, and the thermostat will eventually figure it out.
When I saw the Nest thermostat I yawned, since I had these features 20 years ago, albiet without Internet connectivity.