Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: What To Do About Patent Trolls Seeking Wi-fi License Fees?
An anonymous reader writes "My company has been contacted by certified letter by Delaware law firm. They are seeking license fees for a Wi-fi patent. I believe this is a patent troll (not that this matters in relation to dealing with this issue). This is a newly formed law firm less than 4 months old. This patent is U.S. Patent No. 5,506,866. This patent covers equipment and method related to the transmission of information involving the multiplexing information into a stream of signal points (and demultiplexing the same), and related technology. They have 'offered' to license this patent with no amounts specified. Unfortunately we are a small free software company. The company is setup as a sole proprietorship. I'm not asking for legal advise from the Slashdot community. The question is where might one look for 'legal counsel' with the expertise to answer these types of legal questions as it relates to this inquiry. I would prefer to avoid legal fees, court cases, or license fees running the company into the ground. The company is registered in New Jersey."
You're a free software company yes? If so then you can offer to give them a percentage of profit from each software sale you make (being zero). You'll probably have to swing that idea by a lawyer, but I say screw them.
Wwhere might one look for 'legal counsel' with the expertise to answer these types of legal questions as it relates to this inquiry. I would prefer to avoid legal fees, court cases, or license fees running the company into the ground.
You should see an IP laywer. While this won't avoid you all legal fees, you'll be able to get some basic answers for a small cost, and it will let you know if your other constraints (avoiding court or license fees) are reasonable.
What are the repercussions or ramifications of you writing back,
"Fuck you, we're not going to play this game."
Serious question.
You should find yourself an attorney.
1) this patent was filed in 1993, making it a 17 years from issue date patent. Based upon it's issue date of April 9, 1996, it expires (dies) on April 9, 2013. So in a very very short time, the patent will be useless anyway.
2) What is claimed is based upon side channel data in a simultaneous analog/digital signal. It is very unlikely to actually apply to WiFi, but if they can scare you into paying them, then they win. With a competent atty., it is very likely you can make them look elsewhere for victims they can frighten into settlements.
http://www.google.com/patents/US5506866
Lazy bones.
a public debunking with a standard legal response is exactly what's needed. saves everyone else he time and effort.
Would Canada work for those purposes? I guess so.
See title. Also don't reply until you absolutely HAVE to. Paten runs out this year!
I doubt that you are competent enough to evaluate the patent givien that you are not able/willing to shoulder the burdon of three/four extra clicks to arrive at the relevant documentation.
CC.
TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
Could someone please make this a hyperlink. I'm too lazy to copy and paste it into my url.
It's the only way to be sure.
the growth in cynicism and rebellion has not been without cause
Sometimes I wonder if patent trolls are created by companies producing related software or products to try and kill off all competition.
Everyone and their grandma knows the one of the worst trolls, Intellectual Ventures, was started by "ex" Microsoft EmployeeS, note the S. No surprise there.
Wouldn't be surprised if they were the guys behind most of Microsofts direct attacks on everyone else even remotely a threat to Microsoft.
I would like to see if any of those patent trolls have any relation to any large companies, it would be quite interesting.
... and accordingly, under $other_country law, you plan to enact a plea of Incenderunt Ad Officium. Then ask them exactly *when* they'd like the five gallons of petrol delivered to their letterbox.
similar or same thing?. Maybe some ideas about approching this can be found there:
http://patentexaminer.org/2011/09/innovatios-infringement-suit-rampage-expands-to-corporate-hotels/
This patent is explicitly for PSTN modems, from the looks of it low rate V34 or V17, and is extremely unlikely to be held legitimate or even remotely applicable to WiFi if you go to court/war over it. Further, it expires very soon, so it may be best to not respond and wait for expiration. Simply looking at the diagrams included in the patent text may be sufficient to get the case thrown out, should it come to that. However, by that point, you will have wasted a ton of money.
Probably the best approach is to not respond, and do no further releases until its expiration in april so that if a suit arrives, you can say that you immediately stopped using the offending code. I don't know that I would even bother to hire an attorney given what I see in the patent, but that's up to you.
Alter Aeon Multiclass MUD - http://www.alteraeon.com
Kill their lawyer(s).
I am not a lawyer, so you should find someone who is.
Others have noted that the patent should expire this year. You mentioned that you are a small software vendor - I understand from that that you have about 20 guys at work. Could you operate without WIFI?
Seriously. Turn the WIFI radios of from all laptops and have cables on all desks and in meeting rooms. It's really not that hard.
I have no idea if that would work legally, but technically it's doable. Then you could reply that you are not using any infringing technology.
Not sure what you're asking, but I'd consider answering along the lines of not being aware of how your business, software, is --or even possibly could be-- in any way or form infringing on their patents, how any and all hardware that may possibly be subject to the patent is store-bought and therefore assumed to be properly accounted for by the manufacturer, how it is up to them to establish how what you're doing is in fact infringing, and that you're happy to assist them further for a nicely outrageous hourly rate, paid in advance, because patent law is not your core business.
Otherwise, do we really have to start buying our stuff with patent litigation indemnity guarantees or something? This sort of thing just smells abusive. Isn't there an abusive litigation law somewhere?
Or maybe you could offer to license their complete current-and-future patent portfolio for an one-off payment of some small number, like two dollarcents. Be prepared to back up how that is a reasonable number given how, well, you figure something out.
Or perhaps you could counter-sue for frivolous lititgation and wasting your time for the time it's cost you so far which ought to be a small enough number still to fit in small claims court--the one nearest to you, of course. If you choose to talk first, I'd probably at least warn them that your time isn't free and that continuing to argue will incur consulting charges.
But of course you need to talk to some lawyer type, no going around that. But you can try and find one that doesn't immediately cost an arm and a leg, like a student-run free service or something set up by the eff or something.
I don't think you should be discussing a legal threat in a public forum.
Why, at least as long as he doesn't say "i'm guilty as hell, what can I do to get away with it?"
Personally, I'm interested in knowing if his company actually has anything to do with WiFi, though the answer to that might be dangerously close to "I'm guilty as hell, what can I do to get away with it?" Just reading the submission makes it sound like he got hit by one of those little shits that was going around sending threatening letters to companies about sharing scanned documents, whether they did or not.
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
Can someone please phone me and read this to me, I am too lazy to read.
I'm sorry i can't be bothered providing my phone number.
Probably too late for you, but my first thought was: Register a corporation, sell all of your business assets to that corporation for a dollar. It may be too late though; the courts tend to frown on this sort of thing, especially for small players. Plus, you may have been infringing as your sole proprietorship all these years and still be liable personally.
I hope you have $5,000-10,000 sitting around to find out if this actually applies to you and at least attempt to make them go away.
A question, though: was the letter sent using a traceable method? You'll want a lawyer anyway, but it would be nice to have plausible deniability that you every received this communication to begin with.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
But the only one who will win will be your lawyer who makes his condo payments from your fees if you follow ReadAholic's plan.
You go to a patent litigator after studying the claim, the length the patent has to run before expiring and tell the attorney you will pay him for one hours work to send a forceful "You don't deserve anything." letter and the reasons why (suggested by other readers here on Slashdot).
That will be very worthwhile.
Install a browser add-on that automatically makes links from text URLs. Any browser worth shit will have one.
Given the content of the patent, near-term expiration, and the fact that you were specifically targeted as a small business unlikely to have significant resources, the entire business model of this "law firm" revolves around extorting "license fees" from scared small businesses like yours. If you voluntarily agree to pay them, they win. If you tell them to buzz off, they move on to find the next sucker.
What _doesn't_ fit in to their business model is taking even one person to court. The cost of a single suit would negate the free money "licensing fees" from potentially hundreds of suckers who just went ahead and wrote a check out of fear.
I'm assuming that your company has an attorney? This is the point where they need to lean heavily on their social contacts to find someone who specializes in either:
a) Patents
b) Tech
c) Both (preferably)
Otherwise, I'd ask as many competent people that you know/trust to go through their rolodexes for "friends of friends". As a last resort, I guess you could visit some of the places where prominent opensource folk hang out. Hell, amazing things have happened on Reddit, so see if you can get some traction there as well.
Whatever you do, DON'T JUST IGNORE IT. It is my understanding that if you don't show up to defend yourself, you can get a default judgement against you even if the claims are complete bullshit.
Good luck!
Isn't it a shame that there isn't a significant, statutory penalty for filing or threatening to file a false claim?
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
The Groklaw community will give you plenty of help. Just ask!
If it's a random contact (which it probably is ... and unjustifiable, at that), they won't try twice. If it's serious, you'll hear from them again.
Call your state bar association. Explain the situation as you have here, that you believe this law firm is possibly abusing the system in an effort to intimidate small businesses like yours into paying since that would likely cost less than hiring a law firm with expertise in patent law. Ask them to recommend some options, e.g., a non-profit legal center or a firm that wouldn't end up costing you much in return for sending a response to these guys basically just telling them to back off. You might also consider calling your state attorney general's office - they may someone tasked with helping small businesses in situations like this.
U.S. patents subsisting as of the effective date of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (June 8, 1995), or whose applications were still pending on that date, expire 17 years after issue or 20 years after filing, whichever is longer. U.S. patents applied for after that date expire 20 years after filing, plus term extensions for undue examination delay or regulatory approval delay. The last of the MP3 patents, U.S. Patent 6009399, was filed in 1997 and is believed to expire in 2017 according to the list in this article.
Link.
You should always answer a lawyer who sends you a letter. Even a troll. Just make sure your answer is either useless to them or can be used to stall the case.
For example you could send a letter explaining that you don't believe your company infringes on said patent amd ask for clarification on why they believe otherwise.
When you get an answer to that, your next letter should be a series of questions asking how they know stuff about your company. Ask them where they got their information from, and ask them to provide a full report on all data collected about you or the company. They may very well be legally obligated to respond to inquiries about collected data.
Finally, ask them for instructions on how they believe you can stop infringing the patent. Explain you have no desire to infringe on it, that you believe you are indeed not, but that you would be happe to evaluate any suggestions they might have regarding ways to ensure the alleged infringement.
Each time wait 7-9 days before responding.
If they get difficult ask for a personal meeting at your office and make sure to explain how busy you are when you apoligize for being unavailable until ... approx 9-17 days later.
By the time you are done with this the patent expiation date will be closer and they will have wasted a ton of time. Also should the case ever get to trial you can show that you have honestly tried to cooperate in any way possible (short on paying for the infringement you don't believe is taking place).
It is almost as much fun as fooling nigerian scammers.
Put them to work. It isn't really that hard. :-)
- Jesper
My security clearance is so high I have to kill myself if I remember I have it...
Once you have notice of a potential claim, it's too late.
TANSTAAFL
In order to be found in violation of this patent, your violation must satisfy all the claims listed on the patent.
Claims #3, #24, #37, #46 refer to an analog voice signal, not present in WiFi data communications.
Claims #23, #36, #45, specifically refer to a modem
Additionally, most of this patent seems to be algorithmic. There are a number of claims that would be thrown out based on them describing
a mathematical function.
This would not survive a re-examination, but since it expires so soon, it wouldn't even make the short list.
and spend several tens of thousands of dollars doing it. perfect for a sole proprietorship, small business!!! great idea!!!!!!
>
Now, why those people aren't going after Linsys, Netgear, etc. ... and the cell phone companies has me a little confused because they have the deep pockets - and a much better chance of a payoff.
It's actually a much better chance of getting a "lol, go away tiny troll" letter from those companies with huge legal departments.
But clicking is so HARRRRRRRrrdddddd!
But if it get serious, close the company, and open again with new name.
The patent in question is for "Side-channel communications in simultaneous voice and data transmission "
Does this apply to you? How? I run a business, and I use WiFi. I couldn't figure out how the legal threat applies to me. Can you think of how exactly this applies to you? If not, you could simply ignore the letter.
And while I am not an attorney, if you are going to get sued then sole-proprietorship is kinda risky if you have significant personal assets. Think about converting to a LLC. They can still take the company, but they can't take your house
... should be the next monkey sent to space by the Iranian Space Programm.
Seriously. I could apply that patent to the last 40 years of naval communications systems; most of which are public domain.
Unless you have some significant amount of money, and unless they have some kind of significant infringement claim, if neither of those are true, then you really have nothing for them to go after, combined with the fact that the patent expires soon, this seems like a desperate act. If they won't go after a business with a large amount of money, that should say a lot. If they are only looking for a quick settlement, then I agree with some of the previous posters, hire an experienced patent attorney to send them a strong Denial + Fuck You letter. Expect to pay for some 5 hours of attorney time for them to review the patent, your company, and develop some basic strategy should you get sued in the future. The letter may need to be written with a strategy in mind. These attorneys typically cost $275 to $500 per hour, and you may need one in your state, or in the state of Delaware.
Don't ignore them, if they do file a lawsuit, you want your record to show your consistent position from the very beginning. The patent details generic principles as applied to 1980s phone modem technology, it's not exactly a slam-dunk for them and if they aren't suing big guys with deep pockets, it's because they have little go on and they are looking for guys who are scared into quick settlement. They want to make $10,000 while paying for $275 of attorney time themselves. If that's the true situation, then Denial + Fuck You is going to be the end of the harassment. If they have deep pockets and are looking for blood, you are probably one of many being sued and the attorneys will waste your time and money for months or years to come. I'd say good luck, but who the fuck wants to hear that?
Would someone please write this reply for me?
Firefox and Chrome both support highlighting the url text and opening in a new tab without addons.
The article clearly states many facts that are questioned or stated as courses of action from the respondents in this thread.
He is explicitly asking how to find a lawyer.
He is not asking for advice technical or legal from Slashdotters, only how to find a lawyer!
He is already an S Corp, that's what a sole proprietorship corporation is.
To the OP. You don't state where you are so, this is the best I can offer.
Check with the EFF.
Look at this Inc magazine article.
Do not speak to these vultures at all. Only your lawyer should contact them.
I'm curious if you are providing WiFi service, using it in your software, or simply have WiFi in your office?
If you have time and want some lulz contact The Oatmeal.
You shouldn't have accepted the certified letter.
Certified letters have to have the sender noted on the slip that you get from the post office. Sometimes the post office doesn't do this (I have to remind my postal carrier all the time), but if you return the slip with "WHO IS THE SENDER?" written on it then they will fill it out properly and redeliver it.
If the sender isn't someone you know, or with whom you have a business arrangement (and from whom you might be expecting such a letter), don't take delivery. Don't send it back "refused delivery", just don't go get it. You can claim that you were out of town, never got the note, never had time to get it, or otherwise had a legitimate excuse. They can't do anything unless they have proof of "notice of service", which means that they have proof that they contacted you for the suit.
A certified letter is proof of service (ie - you were served with the letter), and they can use this to file suit against you.
If you don't accept the letter, they have to hire someone to personally hand you the notice. This costs them money - in my area the sheriff charges $80 for serving letters. The sheriff will get to it "when he gets to it", which in practice means anywhere from 2 weeks to never.
(As a personal anecdote, some bank in NYC decided from their internal records that they had been paying my NH property taxes for the last 5 years, and "would I just enclose a check for this and send it back"? I never accepted any of their certified letters, and they couldn't be bothered to send a person out to deliver the notice personally. Eventually they gave up. I had cancelled checks going back 5 years, but couldn't convince them otherwise because "their records showed payments for the last 5 years.")
This is one way to deal with frivolous lawsuits. If the lawsuit is genuine, then these sorts of barriers won't matter and you can address the legitimate legal issues. If the lawsuit is genuine and is something that you should address, then they should have no problem sending you information in a regular letter, which isn't considered proof of service.
I know this advice will cause the real lawyers here to cringe and complain, but then again they don't have any good ways to block frivolous suits.
S Corp and LLC fees in most states are maybe $50 or $100 per year, unless you're in fucking California. Pretty good deal if you only want to lose your business and not your house. That is, unless you've mortgaged your house to finance your business.
Some of us nerds have experience in business, law, and/or legal matters, which makes slashdot perhaps the best place to ask in some of these situations...
While I'm not very experienced in US and IP law, I don't understand how a user of a commercially available product can be held liable for using something he just bought. How should one be expected to ensure that every piece of hardware you buy on the open market is legal as far as IP and licensing goes? ... including damages payments for the company targeted in this way ...
Sounds to me like it's a complete scare tactics on the side of this lawyer, and should be punishable by law
But then, when has the legal system been sane and understandable for any person with at least half a brain ...
While it might not directly apply to you, this might still be worth to consider.
http://www.ted.com/talks/drew_curtis_how_i_beat_a_patent_troll.html
Trolls want to make money, you might want to make sure that they know that they won't get money from you (you rather spend it fighting them) and that you will not make it easy for them...
Pound sand, lawyer scum! Sincerely,
if you are actively involved in free software, you automatically qualify for free assistance from the Software Freedom Law Centre. phone them up, immediately. do not hang around. also you did the right thing asking around: do more of that, and specifically ask people to find prior art. look up what newegg did. the article was on here last week.
What's even more interesting is that IEEE doesn't list it as a WiFi related patent: http://standards.ieee.org/about/sasb/patcom/pat802_11.html
And considering IEEE doesn't tend to mess around about these sort of things. Actually you might want to contact them on this one. If it works once it could work on bigger players as well, so there is a chance they'd actually take a look at the patent and see if it's worth anything. While I doubt it'll help, it probably wouldn't hurt to try.
based on a very quick search, you can tell them to go fuck themselves. here's the patent:
http://www.google.com/patents/US5506866?printsec=abstract#v=onepage&q&f=false
it's originally by AT&T. it's a patent on the means to combine simultaneous voice and data onto a single line. the submission date is in 1993.
however, if you look at this: http://www.tutorialspoint.com/gsm/gsm_overview.htm
you will see that GSM was started as far back as 1982. GSM includes GPRS, which includes a means to combine simultaneous voice and data into a single transmission.
there will be plenty more examples like this. i recommend that you find lots of examples, but any one of those examples can be used to tell these patent trolls to go fuck themselves.
How can software be "equipment and method related to the transmission of information" until combined with something to run it on? Maybe the user of the software is infringing, but surely not the provider of the software?
It really bugs me that software developers get chased for patent violations when software by itself doesn't do anything. If every last device that could execute the software were destroyed would it still violate a patent? Many software firms provide indemnity to their users against potential patent violation, but if someone runs a free software project then they explicitly do not.
There are four kinds of people in this world: cretins, fools, morons, and lunatics - Umberto Eco
One my ex bitches wrote me a bad check...CA law puts a lot of power in your hands if you get a bad check. However you have to contact them by registered mail with the legal document saying they owe you double the amount. The best defense? All she did was refuse the letter. You power goes out the window. Nothing to do past that but small claims court. I have yet to see a penny that is owed me.
If you don't know the sender, don't accept registered mail, there is no legal requirement to do so. Return to sender, you've never been notified of whatever is in the letter, no problem. :)
Tweet, tweet, all id10t's out of the gene pool, open swim is over.
It might be a mistake to contact them in any way except as advised by legal counsel. I know nothing of the law in this area, but someone I know was once contacted by an organization trying to collect an alleged debt of a dead person, and the legal advice in that case was that to acknowledge the correspondence could make things more difficult.
Drew Curtis had some interesting ideas on fighting patent trolls. In cases, like this, you ask the patent trolls for explicit evidence of infringement, in which case, this puts the burden of proof on them. This isn't legal advice, but could provide some direction as to fighting back. Drew Curtis How I beat a patent troll
I don't think you should be discussing a legal threat in a public forum.
Agreed. It is possibly dangerous.
Talk to an attorney.
Its VERY serious. You can lose a lot of money by doing the wrong thing.
Slashdot, as a community, has shown in one patent article after another than there's literally no collective wisdom, from reading and interpreting patents, to offering advice. The worst thing you could do would be to take any here that is anything more than "talk to an attorney, and stop talking about it online until you do so".
Can you be sure that aggressive approach gets the best results?
http://tinyurl.com/aslunde
"Remember, politicians and diapers should be changed often and for the same reason."
Are you enjoying...your American dream ?
Just a consideration, but patent trolls normally approach those that are in a position to pay because it is best for them to gain an income and not just kill the cash-cow. This is now an unfortunate path in business, most tech companies will receive a claim and have to defend it and the resulting costs. You will need to talk to an IP lawyer and put forward a reasonable argument. A claim however (I am sure confirmed by a lawyer which I am not) will consider the request from a legal standpoint, is it a registered formal request or just an email that in all fairness may be ignored.
Seriously, as a Gedankenexperiment imagine what might happen if the next time one of these patent trolls set up shop every single one of them was gunned down within a week of them mailing their first extortion letter. I'd be willing to bet that you'd have a lot of people who were considering this line of business suddenly decide that getting a real job looked pretty good.
cheap labor conservatives - they want to keep you hungry enough to be thankful for minimum wage.
Why not ask the questions from the attorney?
" we are a small free software company" Offer them 5% of gross from software sales. Agree to 10 if they reimburse you for attorney's fees. Find a good attorney who enjoys this kind of thing, they are out there!
I know I'm responding to AC, but I'll bite:
He did NOT "ask a bunch of nerds important legal questions". He asked how he should go about finding a qualified lawyer.
Reading comprehension. It's fun. Try it sometime.
I won't join Slashcott. OTOH, If Beta goes live, I just won't be back until it's fixed. Sorry Dice.
To go fuck themselves. The patent expires in 2 months.
Many businesses are receiving letters like this. It's a fraud.
You might want to read this article:
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Cisco-Motorola-Netgear-Aim-Cannons-At-WiFi-Patent-Troll-121594
And this:
http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20121009/01444620656/cisco-motorola-netgear-team-up-to-expose-wifi-patent-bully.shtml
"Last year, we wrote about a crazy patent troll, named Innovatio, who had sued a ton of restaurants and hotels, claiming that anyone who used WiFi was violating its patents. It was even claiming that individuals who use WiFi at home infringed too -- but that it wouldn't go after them "at this time." Instead, it preferred to focus on shaking down tons of small businesses, offering to settle for $2,500 to $3,000 -- which is cheaper than hiring a lawyer to fight it, no matter how bogus. We noted at the time that Motorola and Cisco had gone to court to try to get a declaratory judgment to protect its customers. "
Read this paper: Startups and Patent Trolls by Prof. Colleen V. Chien, Santa Clara University School of Law.
I am not a crackpot.
Maybe the best course of action when dealing with these types of law firms is to actually kill the principles of the firm. This will send a clear message to the legal profession: watch it or you might be next.
I don't think you should be discussing a legal threat in a public forum.
Agreed. It is possibly dangerous.
From this article: Patent trolls want $1,000—for using scanner.
Another tactic that clearly has an effect: speaking out, even when done anonymously. It hardly seems a coincidence that the Project Paperless patents were handed off to a web of generic-sounding LLCs, with demand letters signed only by “The Licensing Team,” shortly after the “Stop Project Paperless” website went up. It suggests those behind such low-level licensing campaigns aren’t proud of their behavior. And rightly so.
I am not a crackpot.
Additionally, most of this patent seems to be algorithmic. There are a number of claims that would be thrown out based on them describing a mathematical function.
hehe, good luck on that one. If you want to patent an algorithm, all you have to do is prepend your algorithm with this statement, "A method for......"
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
If the patent troll has stated exactly what patent they are exerting and on what equipment, then I would be tempted to contact the manufacturer of said equipment, since if the license is valid, then they are likely already licensees of said patent. If not, then you know you need to work out if the patent is valid
I would suggest pinging te EFF and see what thy have to say. The sad truth is thar due to the way the US legal system works, only the lawyers are likely be the winners. Patent trolling is a current form of legal extortion, where few people in power want accept something is broken.
BTW which patent are they refererring to?
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
"In a simultaneous voice and data communication system" So what does this have to do with WIFI? Is someone somehow attaching a "voice signal" to the wifi traffic?
Can someone please phone me and read this to me, I am too lazy to read.
Wow. And I thought I was fscked up today. I didn't wake up until 1500h. You people give me hope for the week.
"Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit
I'm pretty sure that's not right (but see my nick).
The claims are each enforceable in their own right, but typically get chained together ("Claim 2: The method in claim 1, further ...").
If one claim is not relevant, then only those claims depending on it are irrelevant.
Wired ethernet is faster and more reliable.. just sayin...
You're a small software company. How are you possibly violating a wifi patent? (I though CSIRO invented wifi...) Have they listed what product of yours violates their patent? No? No problem.
Agreed. The Free Software Federation is set up to give legal advice and even can represent free software companies. At the very least they can point you to someone that can help.
Ignore them. Using this patent (IANAL, but still) they could sue anyone using the net. Even using a protocol over a (par of) UART(s) could be a reason. If they can't be ignored, hire an IP-lawyer and counter-sue for damages (reputation, legal costs, lost revenue, etc).
Timeo hominem unius libri
Mod parent up, patent infringement has a statute of limitations of six years. If the patent holder can show you were violating the patent while it was active they have six years to do something about it, assuming that they don't wait years after finding out you violated their patent and triggering laches.
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
Yeah, this exactly makes no sense if it's related to WiFi. And there's more than enough prior art on this one anyway just by looking at the title...
FFY
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
People need to stop feeding the patent trolls. People should not pay trolls a dime. In fact, people should be counter suing trolls and get the DOJ involved in this to nail their filthy hides to the underside of the bridge as a warning to other would be patent trolls. Write your Congressional critters and sign this petition:
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/make-patent-trolls-pay-all-costs-associated-their-frivolous-lawsuits-if-they-lose/gWPpVYMt
Ignore it - a lot of Americans have these revolutionary gun fantasies to compensate for the reality of them having to put up with having their balls squeezed by an authority figure each time they fly.
Can you be sure that aggressive approach gets the best results?
Who cares, as long as the bastard's dead? Lifes's short. You wanna live forever?
"Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit
Even if we take the (rather far-fetched IMO) view that this patent is actually enforceable, how is the end user liable? Shouldn't responsibility for this be on the manufacturer of the access point and/or the controller chip contained therein?
It describes ISDN. In fact it is referenced by a later (1995) patent which mentions ISDN by name. Having actually used ISDN at one point for my network uplink it is pretty clear that's what it is talking about. (Well, maybe its that my dad wrote a bunch of the ISDN code for ATT/Bell Labs and when he heard I was getting ISDN I got details on how it works -- couldn't just go look it up in wikipedia back then!)
Unless your little OSS company produces an app which does something similar -- voice and data at once, its probably not going to be hard (but may be expensive) to defend yourself.
Slashdot Patriotism: We Support our Dupes!
The patent in question appears to be held by AT&T. IANAL, but presuming this law firm actually represents AT&T(it's possible they are just trying to scam you) and presuming that the idea of you violating said patent isn't laughably ridiculous(ie your product doesn't connect to any kind of network whatsoever, not just doesn't infringe said patent) you're pretty much screwed. The odds of you beating without going bankrupt are pretty near to zero so find yourself a lawyer, find out if the law firm actually represents AT&T, and find out what you need to do to either license the wretched thing or if there's a legal way for you to bin the product.
Opera, too.
It's never so bad that it can't get worse.
I think this is a good response: http://jackofkent.blogspot.ru/2010/05/reply-given-in-arkell-v-pressdram.html
Your local ham radio (or Amateur Radio if you prefer) operator's club will quickly be able to decifer this bogus patent & provide any lawyer you may choose with valuable ammunition in fighting these trolls. This may include prior art for patent invalidation, expert testimony for hearings, & might even contain a lawyer or two. As a bonus, you may also find additional users &/or developers. For more information on finding a club or events near you, check out http://www.arrl.org/ for more information.
Yes, clearly this is the best response for a sole proprietorship.
Publicly declare the complaint is invalid and hope that somebody with real money will pay for your defence.
Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
http://www.amberscope.com/?kcJTj5uA finds 26 potential prior art patents, I have marked up 7 candidates worth further investigation. Now to read them all...
Option 1: Agree, and pay up. However, the licence agreement you sign will probably be walled and worded so that only the one patent under discussion is covered in the settlement. When the troll comes back with another vague-sounding patent, because you paid up on the first without a fight, you are back in the same situation.
Option 2: Tell them to print a copy of the licence agreement, scrunch it up and insert it into an appropriate cavity on their CEO.
Option 3: Ignore it. The troll has probably sent out quite a few of these letters, and the best way to get their attention is to send back some kind of a response (either the "yes we will pay" or "no we will not pay" type).
Option 4: Several people have already listed a few law firms with people specialized in IP law, and asking around will typically find you one who is able/willing to take on a case like this on a pro-bono or no win-no fee basis. However, I would suggest asking what happens in the event that you win the case and the troll is required to pay your costs, but the troll gets wound up on the day of the judgement as a shell company with no assets.
One other thing - I would suggest contacting the maker of the wi-fi gear you are using. On the up-side (ideal world), they should be willing to get their legal people to deal with the issue as it will directly affect their future product sales. If they say "your lawsuit, your problem", then you know they are a bunch of idiots not deserving of your money, so you know not to buy their stuff in future.
... the reply given in the case of Arkell v. Pressdram
Sound advice. Make them file an actual suit, Should they actually do so, the OP could get his lawer to file a 3rd-party complaint against his wifi manufacturers (+ other big manufactureres potentialy infringing). This would drag the big guns into the fight, see if the troll actually wants to tangle with cisco & co in the courtroom.
you have moved your mouse, please reboot to make this change take effect
http://eff.org/
THINK! It's patriotic
"In order to be found in violation of this patent, your violation must satisfy all the claims listed on the patent.
"
Very wrong. If you satisfy only a single *independent* claim you violate the patent. The dependent claims (that is, the ones that refer to one above, are there for the patentee/applicant for limitation of the independent claim should that not be patentable).
You violate an independent claim if you do EVERYTHING that is in that *independent* claim. If you do, the case is clear-cut. If you don't, you ma If only it were that easy: There could be some leeway in the interpretation of the claim that makes that the claim is interpreted a bit broader.
Do mind that a patent can have more than one independent claim (three is not uncommon in the US).
If you infringe an independent claim, it is worthwhile to figure out whether more relevant prior art exists than considered during the patent procedure. A list of the prior art considered is found on the front page of the patent. There is a chance that the patent got granted broader than warranted. It could be that you don't infringe after limitation of the claim.
Bert
Patent attorney (not a lawyer; that's something different).
Kthnxbai
If they want to prove otherwise, they've got some work to do !
I fail to understand how purchasing a wifi adaptor from a third party vendor, who bought from a distributor, who bought from a manufacturer who will have had to conform and pay any patent fees applicable, suddenly becomes the problem of someone who had no part in its' manufacture.
Then again, I'm in the UK, and we haven't got quite *that* mad yet.
It's not just clicking. This UI travesty actually forces you to actually drag your mouse and then RELEASE the damn mouse button. Criminy.
Do get qualified legal help. On first glance it is specific and demands both end points be identical. If you have not disclosed the internals (whoops open source) there is no way you have violated their patent unless you have an interoperability product.
If you have shipped product you are in a different boat than just getting ready to ship.
If you have venture cap kick it their way quickly.
Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't. Mark Twain.
Your product is "open" so shutting the doors of the old company and opening a new company is one strategy.
I.e. after consulting with councle for routine reasons it was clear that the old structure was ill chosen and ....
Correctly done it is then possible to make many copies of one letter, a reply letter that the business is gone, poof, defunct....
Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't. Mark Twain.
Ask an atourney ... Think like modern medicine. See a GP and make sure it is not something common and easy to sort out. A grand or less should cover it including a referral to the right folk. Save the "Lacking specific information and disclosure on your part to our knowledge we do not infringe directly or indirectly" letter for later.
Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't. Mark Twain.
The way it's laid out in the submission, it sounds like he could just ignore it as an unsolicited business proposal. That he put together it's coming certified mail from a law firm as a legal threat that could destroy his business if not acted upon is a great marketing ploy on their part.
But if all the letter says is "We have this great Wi-Fi patent. Would you like to license it?" he doesn't need to do anything and can safely ignore it.
That probably puts you into the EFF's area of competence.
If they don't have continuing cases of this sort, they probably know of other people in your situation - approximate or precise - and will know who is already dealing with related cases. There's probably no need to go around re-inventing the legal wheel on this, and joining up with some other people who are being attacked by these trolls is likely to reduce individual costs and beat the trolls harder.
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
It's not a question of the *burden* of 3/4 mouse clicks, it's leaving oneself open to being patent trolled for the process of making those clicks. Seriously, can we take that risk?