One Man's Battle With Patent Trolls

farrellj writes "Dovden Investments, labelled as a Patent Troll by many, got more than they bargained for when they went after Ottawa developer Larry Dunkelman. Mr. Dunkelman wrote BusBuddy, an app that takes GPS and scheduling data from OC Transpo, the local city bus service, and predicts when the bus you are waiting for will actually arrive. But when Dovden came along and asked for $10,000, as a 'licensing' fee, Dunkelman got angry, and decided to fight. 'They claim to have patented the method of using GPS location on vehicles to determine when they will arrive at a certain place,' Dunkelman said. 'This applies to buses, package delivery, airplanes, trains - any business that employs a fleet of vehicles in which they track their location to arrive at a certain place, is open to this patent troll.' Dunkelman hired an intellectual property lawyer and started chipping away at the company's claims. Dovden has since discontinued the suit and are now being chased by Dunkelman and his lawyer for legal costs."

Comments

Back under the bridge, troll!!

[haruchai]

Well done, Larry. I hope more developers have a spine as stiff as yours.

Re:Back under the bridge, troll!!

[spamchang]

Make it a class action suit. Demand a list of everyone to whom Dovden has ever sent a threatening letter.

Re:Back under the bridge, troll!!

[FatLittleMonkey]

I hope more developers have a spine as stiff as yours.

It's the only thing that can carry the load of his enormous balls.

Re:Back under the bridge, troll!!

[thegarbz]

If you're lucky when you win you'll get a voucher for a $10 discount to use for your next patent licencing deal.

Re:Back under the bridge, troll!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Take them for all they're worth (admittedly they are worthless bags of scum, but take all the money they have).

Re:Back under the bridge, troll!!

[Anonymous Coward]

the point of a class action suit wouldn't be to get everyone rich, it would be to make dovden hurt

Re:Back under the bridge, troll!!

[Anonymous Coward]

With the side effect of making the lawyers filing the suit rich while the people actually damaged by Dovden's actions receive a pittance.

Re:Back under the bridge, troll!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Publicly crushing the testicles with a pair of pliers is my suggested method.

Re:Back under the bridge, troll!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Make it a class action suit. Demand a list of everyone to whom Dovden has ever sent a threatening letter.

It's cases like this shows the stupidity of allowing software patents. Using GPS to track positional information should not be patentable, THAT'S WHAT IT WAS CREATED FOR!

I think the people who get sued for stupid patents like this one should in turn sue the patent examiner that granted the patent.

Re:Back under the bridge, troll!!

[quacking duck]

The developer of the X-Plane flight simulator is also fighting the patent troll suing him for using a Google-approved and provided API for verifying Android purchases. He's fighting using his own money too, which lawyers have advised could cost him $1.5 million even if he wins.

They aren't the only dev who this troll is suing, though I believe they're one of the few who's actually big enough (barely) to mount a defence. Google has refused to offer legal or even token moral support for their developers, and the API is probably still in place in the latest version, a Trojan horse waiting to happen to other unsuspecting devs.

Re:Back under the bridge, troll!!

[Anonymous Coward]

In other words, good news all around?

Re:Back under the bridge, troll!!

[crakbone]

Sorry. IRS has prior art.

Re:Back under the bridge, troll!!

[losfromla]

uh, you probably are not familiar with human anatomy and while your sentiment is admirable, I suggest that the spine does not bear much of the load of typical balls, enormous or otherwise. Maybe you were confused between breasts and balls?

Re:Back under the bridge, troll!!

[Archangel Michael]

Fixing Class Action lawsuits, and other similar torts would be easy.

1) All Punitive damages are given to the state, to set up a compensation fund for victims, or to the General Fund.
2) Lawyers fees are not generated by Punitive Damages, 100% of all Punitive damages goes to the Compensation or General Fund
3) Actual Damages goes to the victims. 100% of them.
4) Legal Damages/Fees goes to the lawyers. These can be based on either/both Actual Damages, or Punitive Damages, but shall not exceed a certain percentage (10% suggested) but could be less.

This would take the "profit" motive of huge awards away from victims, and their lawyers. It would allow for juries to award punitive damages, to actually punish those that cause damages, while not rewarding victims with ridiculous windfall sums of money. These simple changes would help prevent lawsuit abuses. Especially in torts such as IP lawsuits. In the case of IP lawsuits, the one suing would actually have to show actual monetary "harm". This means they would have to have a working product/service or licensing scheme for their product. Sitting on a Patent and not making anything violates the whole idea of patents;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.

When the system no longer "Promtes progress of science and useful arts" ... it is broken.

Re:Back under the bridge, troll!!

[Anonymous Coward]

With the side effect of making the lawyers filing the suit rich while the people actually damaged by Dovden's actions receive a pittance.

Then they can choose to not join the class action and instead take direct action on their own (or do nothing).

Also, having a class action judgement against the firm can give others certain types of legal leverage. In some cases someone who accepted a deal to "drop a lawsuit in return for payment and promise not to sue" may be able to use the class action judgement to get that previous agreement tossed out and press charges.
In any event, it sends a big fat message to other potential patent trolls, which proactively helps others who have not yet been sued. It also makes it more likely people will resist patent trolls who use the extortion racket (pay us or we sue!).

In any event, I fail to understand what your problem with the lawyers is. The ones representing the troll aren't getting much, if anything, and ruining their reputations to boot. If you don't want to hire a lawyer yourself then don't- but if you do then it's only fair that you're paying them for their expertise.

Re:Back under the bridge, troll!!

[MacDork]

That assumes you can find them. Most of the big trolls are hidden behind so many shell companies, you'll never find them. You could intimidate their post office box maybe? To solve this problem, you need to stop it at the source. Revoke all software patents and outlaw any future ones. That involves you and all your angry developer friends standing outside your representatives' offices with pitchforks and torches. Want change? Organize.

Re: Back under the bridge, troll!!

[Anonymous Coward]

I have bulging discs and a couple partially collapsed vertebrae, dies that count?

Re:Back under the bridge, troll!!

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't want to be overly pessimistic, particularly since this guy did such a great thing, but I've read that a lot of these bullshit shill co's are set up so they can be easily busted out and reopened next week in the same office.

Re:Back under the bridge, troll!!

[Anonymous Coward]

which lawyers have advised could cost him $1.5 million even if he wins.

That's really the part that makes me want to throw up. These fuckwit patent trolls wouldn't be a problem if even a successful defense is devestating.

Re: Back under the bridge, troll!!

[Anonymous Coward]

I like this but you would be hauled away. Do it with a mask for each lawyer that works for the firm. Work for a patent troll strictly for greed, get your bones broke. Try writing claims with you hands in casts. Or opening your car door. Or holding your morning coffee. Not too vicious, just enough to say stop.

Re: Back under the bridge, troll!!

[iamhassi]

Laywers get rich regardless. Point is patent troll suffers.

Re:Back under the bridge, troll!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah, you must be an American then...

Re:Back under the bridge, troll!!

[CCarrot]

I hope more developers have a spine as stiff as yours.

It's the only thing that can carry the load of his enormous balls.

uh, you probably are not familiar with human anatomy and while your sentiment is admirable, I suggest that the spine does not bear much of the load of typical balls, enormous or otherwise. Maybe you were confused between breasts and balls?

Well, he's proven to have plenty of guts, so maybe's that's what the spine is supporting? :)

Somehow "I hope more developers have a pelvis as sturdy as yours" just doesn't have the same ring...

Re:Back under the bridge, troll!!

[IndustrialComplex]

Since class action status must be approved by a judge, why not create a 'Class Action District Attorney' as a government position?

The CADA would be paid in a manner similar to a regular DA, and just logs hours. He doesn't get to select the cases he prosecutes, they are referred to the CADA office by the judge once class action status is approved. Resources could be managed in a manner similar to the prosecutor's office. If enough CA cases aren't moving through fast enough people can pressure the legislature to assign additional resources to the office. (or however that is normally accomplished for prosecutors now)

To me it makes sense for class action lawsuits to be handled by a government representative because the scope of the case. Once you reach class action status you really are faced witha situation where it is 'The People v A company' and not 'A person v A company'.

Re:Back under the bridge, troll!!

[Anonymous Coward]

About as outmoded as wasting time in the Senate, while Naboo is getting butt-raped.

Re: Back under the bridge, troll!!

[flyneye]

Every city has hoodlums, if you are not a DIYer with the appropriate tools, do not try this at home. Seek professional help.

Re:Back under the bridge, troll!!

[flyneye]

Nonsense. Time tested and true. Fashion is fleeting, style is eternal.
From bronze age kings to the Cosa Nostra to the IRS , this business works. In the ugly world I paint corporations DO the same things over patents. It's a shark eat shark world baby. Get the first bite in and keep chewin or you are todays menu.
If I am manufacturing something perfectly legally and patent troll has some silly similar thingamadoo patent , he is ready to make his living taking my living away. Picture some bully keeping you from the table while he ate your food.
On the other end, If I am patenting something and some industry hoodlum or lawyer knocks on my front door to buy it low or put lead in my brain, it is also time to be ready for that pre-emptive strike followed by a truth telling marathon full of names, addresses and rose pruners.
Business, men bring tools, money and grit and do business. Boys bring nothing , and do nothing.

Re: Back under the bridge, troll!!

[flyneye]

Mexican wrestling mask; The Patent Luchadore!

Re: Back under the bridge, troll!!

[haruchai]

Clients win or lose, lawyers just get paid.

Re:Back under the bridge, troll!!

[MrResistor]

That assumes you can find them. Most of the big trolls are hidden behind so many shell companies, you'll never find them.

Nonsense. Someone's name is on the letter you were sent demanding licensing fees. That person can be found and "convinced" to give you the information necessary to find any other people that might be involved. The shell company game only defends against legal methods of discovery. It will not protect you from someone who is willing to use torture, rape, and arson to find you.

Re:Back under the bridge, troll!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Simple, eh?

Fixing Class Action lawsuits, and other similar torts would be easy.

1) All Punitive damages are given to the state, to set up a compensation fund for victims, or to the General Fund.
2) Lawyers fees are not generated by Punitive Damages, 100% of all Punitive damages goes to the Compensation or General Fund
3) Actual Damages goes to the victims. 100% of them.
4) Legal Damages/Fees goes to the lawyers. These can be based on either/both Actual Damages, or Punitive Damages, but shall not exceed a certain percentage (10% suggested) but could be less.

Point 1: How about NO money goes to the state unless they are one of the plaintiffs? Seriously, they'll get their cut when die, spend, as income tax. Fuck man, think. This money ought go to plaintiffs.

Point 2: There is no place for the gov here unless they are a plaintiff as might be the case for like an EPA fine or something. Repeat of point 1, except the lawyers will need a cut as will be explained...

Point 3: Actual damages is a fiction. It is an estimate and it will vary from victim to victim. Some get too much, some too little. You can't fix that without wasting too much money and just enriching more parasites.

Point 4: Now you feed the lawyers? If the expected payout multiplied by the likelihood of success is too low, nobody is going to go after the corporations. Not the victims, not the lawyers. The world doesn't need more John Edwards but it also doesn't need more Fen-fen?:

Here is a key point:

According to the national law firm Parker Waichman Alonso LLP, drugmaker Wyeth settled the case, involving more than 125,000 former Fen-Phen users, for $3.75 billion in 2000. An additional seventy thousand users opted out of the suit to pursue individual cases against the company; Wyeth set aside $16.6 billion to resolve these cases.

http://www.divinecaroline.com/life-etc/career-money/brockovich-and-beyond-five-famous-class-action-lawsuits

In the class action, 125,000 get $3.75 billion (with lawyers getting a huge cut, no doubt).

Set aside for 70,000 is $16.6 billion. About 8-times as much. Maybe the real victims opted out of the class action system.

I'd prefer reform. E.g., if swallowing things.

Was the swallowed item - say a magnet - intended to not be swallowed? NO WIN!

Was the swallowed item - say a pill - intended to be swallowed? MAYBE!

Re:Back under the bridge, troll!!

[redlemming]

1) All Punitive damages are given to the state, to set up a compensation fund for victims, or to the General Fund.

Great idea, but there's a potential problem here. I'd predict that over time the state will simply start to ensure that most parties in suits that have money will lose the suit and be subject to high punitive damages (in order to fund that state's continuing budget deficits), irregardless of the merits of the case. They'll even invent lots of new torts, with all kinds of excuses for awarding high punitive damages, to facilitate this. They'll let a few people win on the merits from time to time so they can still claim the moral high ground (and hide what's really going on, just like now!).

Just think of all the things they tried to charge Aaron Swartz with (and in doing so, violated all kinds of fundamental rights the government officials involved swore oaths to uphold), and you'll get a pretty good idea of the abuse that would follow the implementation of this rule.

In other words, this approach would create an ethical conflict of interest for the state to game the system, either before the case starts by clever manipulation of the laws, or while the case happens by means of various options available to the judge (not to mention the fact that all kinds of propaganda would probably be created to try to manipulate the jury, and jury sequestration is problematic enough from a fundamental rights perspective as things stand).

We already see this happening on a routine basis in MANY jurisdictions in the handling of purported traffic violations. There's a huge ethical conflict of interest if the money obtained from tickets can go ANYWHERE into the budget of the applicable government, but to date the legal profession and government have both found it inconvenient to acknowledge this huge ethics problem. Thus, history strongly suggests if we create a conflict of interest and give the government the option of abusing it's power, it will proceed to do so.

As an alternative, I'd suggest the winning party be required to directly donate the money for punitive damages to some cause (such as a charity, or a research project) that benefits humanity subject to the following conditions: a) no organizations associated with the cause can operate in any of the the jurisdictions associated with the suit (we might limit this to the jurisdictions in which the winners or their families live or operate), b) the cause can not ask for the money (to limit junk mail and propaganda intended to influence the result), c) none of the winners or their families can do work for the cause, and c) the cause must make its full budget publicly available and list all contributors by name and amount.

If the government was a party to the suit, the rules would need to be a bit more complex.

The government, thus, has no control over this money except to make sure a few relatively simple rules are followed, removing the conflict of interest.

A similar approach could be used to handle the traffic violations problem, incidentally.

In some cases, such as large class action suits, it would be tricky to do this, but a workable option might be to require the cause to be out of the country for those cases (assuming most members of the class are in the country).

Re:Back under the bridge, troll!!

[alexo]

Fixing Class Action lawsuits, and other similar torts would be easy.

Not when the people who have the power to effect such a change have a vested interest in perpetuating the status quo.

When the system no longer "Promtes progress of science and useful arts" ... it is broken.

The system is working as designed.

Basic Math...

[Luthair]

Distance / Speed = Time

Heck, we've probably been estimating our arrival times since we grew big enough brains to recognize a particular rock or tree.

Re:Basic Math...

[Anonymous Coward]

Well that and when we actually started caring about time. Most people didn't so much (except for sailors) until relatively recently in human history.

Re:Basic Math...

[climb_no_fear]

I dunno, if a saber-toothed tiger was chasing you, you probably cared a great deal about your arrival time at the nearest climbable tree or such.

Re:Basic Math...

[climb_no_fear]

And of course, his...

Re:Basic Math...

[smallfries]

This is actually a pretty shit way of doing it; vehicles rarely hold a constant speed. If you build a database of locations and times for a vehicle doing the same route repeatedly then a more appropriate calculation is the median travel time from the given location.

Re:Basic Math...

[sjames]

Only relatively speaking. Nobody much cared whether they became tiger poop at 4P.M or 5P.M. but arriving at the climbable tree before the tiger was of great interest.

Re:Basic Math...

[flyingfsck]

Uhhh... Tigers can climb trees. Estimating the weight of a rock big enough to pin the tiger's tail, may have been more useful.

Re:Basic Math...

[RivenAleem]

It beggers the question, How did we survive before there was an app for that?

Re: Basic Math...

[Anonymous Coward]

Ya mean like the schedule? The point of using GPS is to see when the bus is gonna be late.

Re:Basic Math...

[dywolf]

human beings arent that much changed from prehistory. early nomadic human tribes would have still cared about arrival time, even if not to the precision we care about today. following a herd thats headed to water, you dont want to get their after theyve already moved on, in fact you probably want to get there first so you can setup the ambush before they arrive. or if moving to new hunting grounds when the season changes, you probably want to get there before winter sets in. or if its the rut (prime hunting season) you dont want to miss that, it's easy pickings.

anyway...point is: its not that relatively new. its really a very old concern.
all that's changed is the accuracy and resolution of the time that we care about.

Re:Basic Math...

[StripedCow]

I guess somebody wrote an app. That's how we evolved into app-writers.

Re:Basic Math...

[RivenAleem]

I was expecting, "There's an Ape for that"

Re:Basic Math...

[InvalidError]

We estimate arrival times all the time, albeit subconsciously: whenever you walk or run, you do not consciously monitor your legs, you mindlessly execute a well-timed walk cycle based on estimations from observable surface conditions and when your estimations are too far off the mark, you trip. When you move to grab a glass on the counter and fail to correctly estimate your hand's acceleration and deceleration, you knock the glass over instead of grabbing it.

We do estimations with nearly every single movement we make.

Re:Basic Math...

[geekoid]

But the rarely attack in trees, and trees are a better point to defend against a cat.

They don't have a lot of leverage:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EoGh1Nd86oI&noredirect=1

Re:Basic Math...

[geekoid]

You should ave just said it, it's hilarious.

Re:Basic Math...

[RivenAleem]

Yeah, I thought of it after I made my first comment, pity /. doesn't allow for editing posts ;(

Re: Basic Math...

[losfromla]

or more importantly and worse, early.

Re:Basic Math...

[Archangel Michael]

Actually, I would only care about outrunning the next slowest runner; hence invention of the track shoe

Re:Basic Math...

[smooth wombat]

You're missing the point. One does need to make the calculation to see if they'll be arriving at the tree before or after your hunting partner. If it's before, no problems. If after, pick up the pace!

Re:Basic Math...

[Aonghus142000]

Of course, it must have been nice not to have to respond to a modern level of time precision:

Prehistoric Nomad's Wife (PNW): "Where have you been?"

Prehistoric Nomad: (PN): "What are you talking about?"

PNW: "You said you'd be back by now! You're late!"

PN: "What are you talking about? I said I'd be back later. It's barely now. If anything, I'm early!"

Of course, since people haven't changed, Prehistoric Nomad ended up sleeping outside the tent anyway for the crime of winning an argument.

Re:Basic Math...

[AnalogDiehard]

I dunno, if a saber-toothed tiger was chasing you, you probably cared a great deal about your arrival time at the nearest climbable tree or such.

Nah, I care more about being faster than my friend(s) running from the tiger.

Courts should stamp this out

[EuclideanSilence]

Dovden asked for $10,000. There was probably only a 1 in 1000 chance someone would fight and win. Dovden knew for certain that their patent wasn't innovative; this was no honest misunderstanding. Any damages less than $10000 * 1000 = $10,000,000 makes this a profitable business model.

Any ruling fining Dovden less than $10,000,000 is not enough.

Re:Courts should stamp this out

[EuclideanSilence]

And I'm going to reply to myself. And every lawyer involved in sending these notices should lose their license.

Re:Courts should stamp this out

[flayzernax]

Hear hear! And any damn judge dum enough to let the case even go through without alerting the patttent office and slamming these guys with fines for misuse of the legal system. Fraud. And abuse of government entities in order to harass and whatever else they can muster up.

These people can go to jail. And they can let out a few prostitutes.

Re:Courts should stamp this out

[cheater512]

And be personally liable for some of the damages.

Re:Courts should stamp this out

[Anonymous Coward]

And their pets should be sent to the pound!

Re:Courts should stamp this out

[jamesh]

A customer of ours was recently sent an "about to call debt collectors" letter for an invoice for toner cartridges they hadn't bought. The scammer had done their homework - they had called previously claiming to be from the "federal government" doing a survey on printers so they knew exactly what type of toner the customer would have bought. We called the ACCC and were basically told that if money had actually been paid then we could try the feds and see if they would do anything, but otherwise they weren't going to do anything.

The fact that the scammers were getting away with this sort of shit with basically no risk at all made me quite angry. Stories like TFA make me feel a little better about the world.

Re:Courts should stamp this out

[AK Marc]

Yeah, same happened to me. Someone was doing a "dead relative" scam attempt on me, and I got info about them. Passed it to the FBI cybercrimes fraud division (or the group that indicated they were responsible, if there is no specific division for that), and they got back to me with the message "if you haven't actually lost money on it, go away. If you have lost money on it, you are an idiot, go away". So long as crimes aren't investigated because they are "inconvenient", we'll have escalation in crimes, in both severity and quantity.

Re:Courts should stamp this out

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm curious. Could you sue someone in the amount of "$infinity". The idea being that you're not really after the money, but forcing them into bankruptcy while taking whatever cash they have as an extra bonus.

Re:Courts should stamp this out

[Kaenneth]

They got teenagers with quarter ounces of weed to imprision, stop wasting their valuable property seizure time.

Re:Courts should stamp this out

[Anonymous Coward]

You absolutely can call the Federal Trade Commission and report it. They need to get lots of reports to figure out who is worth going after.

Re:Courts should stamp this out

[Anonymous Coward]

It is simple blackmail, that they discontinued the suit once he started to fight back tells the whole story, they know they have nothing

Re:Courts should stamp this out

[lxs]

And the pound should be threatened with foreclosure by an evil developer.

Re:Courts should stamp this out

[lxs]

One more reason not to participate in surveys.

Re:Courts should stamp this out

[Anonymous Coward]

Did they send this invoice via the United States Postal Service? A Demonstrably untrue invoice?
You sir were clearly not paying attention during the movie "The Firm".

I believe that you or anyone else in receipt of such a communication should contact their USPS Mail Fraud team.
 

Re:Courts should stamp this out

[JosKarith]

And the developer's wife should leave him and take him to the cleaners in the divorce courts.

Wait... what were we talking about again?

Re:Courts should stamp this out

[BenfromMO]

Police departments of all stripes can make more money for their departments through property seizure, so why would they waste time with actual criminals which actually costs them money?

The second we allowed as a society police departments to confiscate individuals' wealth was the second we lost our way as a society. It does not help that tickets and other roadside violations are also money that goes to the local police department directly. And so we have police in this country whose jobs are directly depended on outside revenue streams and so their employers are no longer every citizen, but rather those who they imprison and fine. They are constantly looking for additional people to finance their jobs like that. And what does all of this money that they confiscate give them? Military level arms, body armor, and all sorts of little toys that make breaking into someone's house a quite large ordeal. So next time someone "swats you" you can thank the illegal confiscations and mountains of traffic violations that made it possible for semi-trained idiots to go around with military level machine guns and body armor.

Re:Courts should stamp this out

[Anonymous Coward]

Is his ex wife hot?

Re:Courts should stamp this out

[Anonymous Coward]

A year ago, I sat in on a presentation from the FBI cybercrime unit (Twin Cities.) They're overworked, understaffed, and quite honestly, unless there's a large chunk of money in play (not just potentially,) they don't have the resources to pursue it.

Re:Courts should stamp this out

[geekoid]

sigh.
No. Go through the procedure the bar already has in place. They keep it up they loose their license. Possible civil issues.

We need to put less people in jail, not more.

Re:Courts should stamp this out

[geekoid]

where? where is some in a federal prison for this? any citations at all? no?

Re:Courts should stamp this out

[Anonymous Coward]

A customer of ours was recently sent an "about to call debt collectors" letter for an invoice for toner cartridges they hadn't bought. The scammer had done their homework - they had called previously claiming to be from the "federal government" doing a survey on printers so they knew exactly what type of toner the customer would have bought. We called the ACCC and were basically told that if money had actually been paid then we could try the feds and see if they would do anything, but otherwise they weren't going to do anything.

The fact that the scammers were getting away with this sort of shit with basically no risk at all made me quite angry. Stories like TFA make me feel a little better about the world.

You should hop on the popehat.com web site. He talks about this scam and a couple of others in a few of his articles.

Re:Courts should stamp this out

[tibit]

As flayzernax said: swap them for some prostitutes. Keeps the number incarcerated locally constant :)

Re:Courts should stamp this out

[Anonymous Coward]

What's pretty funny is that the federal government's own propaganda piece actually does, in the process of denying it, admit that there are people incarcerated for simply possessing small amounts of marijuana. But since it's a "small amount" it's okay.

http://www.prisonpolicy.org/scans/whos_in_prison_for_marij.pdf

Re:Courts should stamp this out

[Anonymous Coward]

Police departments of all stripes can make more money for their departments through property seizure, so why would they waste time with actual criminals which actually costs them money?

The second we allowed as a society police departments to confiscate individuals' wealth was the second we lost our way as a society. It does not help that tickets and other roadside violations are also money that goes to the local police department directly. And so we have police in this country whose jobs are directly depended on outside revenue streams and so their employers are no longer every citizen, but rather those who they imprison and fine. They are constantly looking for additional people to finance their jobs like that. And what does all of this money that they confiscate give them? Military level arms, body armor, and all sorts of little toys that make breaking into someone's house a quite large ordeal. So next time someone "swats you" you can thank the illegal confiscations and mountains of traffic violations that made it possible for semi-trained idiots to go around with military level machine guns and body armor.

You can thank terrorists for the militarization of police departments. Since 9-11 the Federal goverrnment has pushed large amounts of money for equipment and training into anti-terrorism grants. Police departments have taken the money and are now pretty well armed and reasonably well trained.

Re:Courts should stamp this out

[AK Marc]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2002666/More-half-U-S-inmates-convicted-drugs-offences.html

First hit on a search. Why do so many people demand citations when it would be hard to conceive of a relevant Google search that didn't present the answer?

Re:Courts should stamp this out

[AK Marc]

Yup, they spend all their time and money investigating petty welfare fraud. None of it is spent on large-scale fraud (until after the news starts covering starving elderly robbed of their retirement). Sorry, no cite. I got it from an ex-FBI agent who quit because she thought she'd be doing good, and not pouring through the bank accounts of the poor and seeing that they had regular deposits of cash, presumed to be from an illegal cash job to keep their welfare, and throwing the poor in jail, while ignoring plenty of real crime. For years, Katrina welfare fraud was more important than anything else, but she stayed on through that, hoping after that focus ended, she'd be doing something else, but then it was back to DC to sit in a basement going through the financials of welfare recipients, spending more money investigating than would ever be recovered.

Using a thimble to bail out a sinking ship, and blaming the poor is all the government does now.

Re:Courts should stamp this out

[Anonymous Coward]

She used to be.

Re:Courts should stamp this out

[Anonymous Coward]

> The second we allowed as a society police departments to confiscate individuals' wealth was the second we lost our way as a society.

In the UK, speed cameras were operated by local chartitable status organisations who took a large cut of the fines to - you guessed it - build more speed cameras.

Between that and the 6-figure sums being paid to the heads of such charities, there was enough public indignation that speed camera charities lost ALL revenue from the cameras and now have to properly justify each location(*) in order to get funds to setup a camera AND to keep existing ones functioning. Unsurprisingly the number of new locations dropped 99% overnight and new ones are only going in where there's a real safety issue.

(*) One section of motorway ended up with speed cameras after a number of "speed related crashes" which turned out to be pedestrian suicides from a particular overbridge. When knowledge of the reason came out, this was one of the turning points in public tolerance of the things (which were widely regarded as a revenue scam in any case)

The USA problem isn't just that police departments get to keep confiscated items - it's down to not having to go through due process to confiscate it in the first place. Such seizures need proper court oversight and this mustn't be at "county court" level, given the self-interest in (elected) USA judges.

donation box

[phantomfive]

Does he have a donation box? I've donated to causes much less worthy.

Re:donation box

[rsborg]

Does he have a donation box? I've donated to causes much less worthy.

Count me in. I want to see Dovden hunted down and made an example of. Perhaps, if Dunkelman doesn't want to solicit external funds, the next worthy Troll Slayer should seek funds on Kickstarter or similar website for the express purpose of making an example of the troll in particular.

Greed knows no limit.

[Anonymous Coward]

Not surprised. Patent trolls apparently don't understand the idea of limits, and they're currently hitting people's tolerance.

Go after the lawyers, too.

[Ichijo]

Any lawyer who aids a patent troll ought to be disbarred.

Re:Go after the lawyers, too.

[Anonymous Coward]

Before or after being disemboweled?

Re:Go after the lawyers, too.

[Anonymous Coward]

After, of course. But not before being patched up so he can be disemboweled again after he's disbarred.

Re:Go after the lawyers, too.

[EuclideanSilence]

A lawyer should be allowed to defend any person, against any charge, against any evidence, without any fear of legal repercussion.

I would prefer the more objective approach, "any lawyer who aids in sending out frivolous (read: obviously going to be overturned) patent notices should be disbarred."

I imagine it wouldn't be impossible for something like that to find its way into some legislation.

Re:Go after the lawyers, too.

[wbr1]

WE DO NOT NEED MORE LAWS!

Felony conviction is cause for disbarment in most jurisdictions.

If an attorney aids and abets fraud, extortion, or is criminally negligent in defending/prosecuting a case, then fucking charge and convict them of -that- crime. They will still be disbarred, and we will actually be prosecuting crimes that matter, instead of letting those with money and power flout the system so egregiously.

Re:Go after the lawyers, too.

[geekoid]

You have no idea why attorney are important, nor do you have any idea why that would pretty much turn over everything to corporation overnight.

You are a clueless irrational idiot who screams 'solutions' to problems you don't understand.

Things change, new laws will always be needed.
The lawyer isn't doing anything illegal. This isn't fraud or extortion.

Re:Go after the lawyers, too.

[wbr1]

If a lawyer knowingly sends out C&D or settle or we'll sue letters for knowingly invalid or absent patents, it IS fraud and extortion. They willfully misrepresented facts to their clients (and their own) betterment. If the patent is valid, then no they attorneys did not break the law, and it is a symptom af a flawed patent system that needs repair.

In neither case do we need more laws on the books.

Re:Go after the lawyers, too.

[wbr1]

Oh, BTW. Name calling does not help your point at all. Next time, actually make an argument, instead of a statement and insults. You'll sound smarter (whether you actually are remains to be seen).

Re:Go after the lawyers, too.

[wiredlogic]

That is all good and well for criminal cases. For civil cases (like patent suits) a lawyer cannot ethically proceed with a case if they know their client is lying or distorting the truth. When a case such as this boils down to an unpatentable mathematical equation the lawyers involved should know that they are exposing themselves to disciplinary action when they fail to withdraw from the suit.

Re:Go after the lawyers, too.

[Anonymous Coward]

They have bowels? I though the entire reason they talked shit was because they lacked that component of their digestive system.

Costs

[Dachannien]

Are patent suit costs in Canada paid for by the losing party? This is one of the big problems in the US - each side usually pays its own costs, even when the patentee loses.

Re:Costs

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah, the great American justice system.

Both sides pay, then the winner has to file a counter suit against the loser for compensation and losses.

So the lawyers get to cash in all over again...

Re:Costs

[Anonymous Coward]

Serious answer here, IAAL in Canada. Yes, in Ontario the losing side pays costs to the winning side. However, "costs" is awarded according to procedures in the court rules, and it doesn't actually represent the literal legal costs of the winning party. Court awarded "costs" usually end up being around a third of actual legal costs, but it's still a penalty for the loser. Going by the summary (haven't read the original article yet), I imagine that Dovden will oppose costs because they unilaterally discontinued the action before the court could dismiss the action with costs awarded against them. A plaintiff discontinuing its action is usually seen by defendants as a good thing, so normally costs aren't awarded in these cases.

Re:Costs

[Anonymous Coward]

Only in very exceptional cases, it's very rare litigation costs are covered in Canada.

Re:Costs

[jittles]

Ah, the great American justice system.

Both sides pay, then the winner has to file a counter suit against the loser for compensation and losses.

So the lawyers get to cash in all over again...

Depends on the state and the laws being violated. I just recently settled a lawsuit with my landlord. I was the defendant, the landlord obviously the plaintiff. They sued me to take possession of the property (AKA for eviction). I counter-sued them for failure to maintain the property in compliance with state and county health and safety codes, as well as other damages. In that case, the loser pays all costs no matter what (unless a settlement stipulates otherwise). It's automatic. And I was looking at tens of thousands of dollars in damages if I lost. Since the owner of the property is not very bright, and since I was in complete compliance with state law, they agreed to pay all my costs and to give me a 33% rent abatement for the period of the lawsuit. Had we gambled in court, I could have received up to $15,000 plus legal fees. Or I could have ended up paying $5000 plus legal fees (my own included).

In many civil areas the loser pays. I think patents are treated differently because the Federal government has not adopted a loser pays system.

Re:Costs

[geekoid]

A loser pay system in patents would destroy it for the very people it should be helping.

Re:Costs

[MobyDisk]

Dropping the suit, but continuing to pursue others for the same patent, is evidence that they are committing fraud. I believe that in the US, there have been cases where MPAA did this "drop the lawsuit" thing and was later forced to pay legal costs anyway.

Re:Costs

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah, the great American justice system.

Both sides pay, then the winner has to file a counter suit...

[emphasis added]

The lawyers for both sides have to file a counter suit? Why have I not heard of this law before?

Re:Costs

[Anonymous Coward]

Like the parent, IAAL in Canada (in fact, in Ontario). The parent is generally correct.

An interesting twist in this case is that Ontario also has a rule about non-residents who try to sue in Ontario courts: at the Defendant's request, the Court will typically require the non-resident to pay into Court, *in advance*, the estimated costs that they would be required to pay if the lawsuit was unsuccessful, without which the Plaintiff can't move forward. That way, a successful Ontario defendant doesn't have to try chasing some deadbeat foreigner in their home courts, possibly in a jurisdiction that won't honour the Ontario cost award.

In this case, the defendant asked the Court to make the plaintiff put up $50,000.00 as security for cost, and the Court probably would have made that order, so Dovden tried to drop the whole thing.

This might say something about how we should deter trolls generally: make them post the cost of losing as a condition of starting the lawsuit.

Can someone explain...

[multiben]

IANAL as will be pretty evident from this confused series of questions, but from the article: 'They claim to have patented the method of using GPS location on vehicles to determine when they will arrive at a certain place,'

So, did they patent it or not? And if they did, then who the hell approved it as a valid innovation???!
If they didn't patent it then it's just a case of straight up fraud isn't it? Conversely, if they do actually hold this patent, then isn't just as clear cut that this poor guy is infringing it - no matter how ridiculous that seems? The article seems to suggest that they are now reviewing whether the patent is valid or not - but once a patent is granted doesn't that automatically mean it's valid too?

Re:Can someone explain...

[a.koepke]

Just because a patent is granted doesn't mean it is valid, it just means you have paid some fees to register your "innovation". Unfortunately, the patent offices get a lot of applications and have been working in "rubber stamp" mode for quite a while. You put your application in, pay your fees and get a rubber stamp on it. Done. There is no real review of the validity of the patent anymore, that stuff just took to long.

The patent office's approach is to approve almost everything and let the lawyers, judges and courts sort out what is valid or not.

Re:Can someone explain...

[meerling]

Stupid and incompetent, but true :(

Re:Can someone explain...

[multiben]

I see. Thankyou. What a depressing situation.

Re:Can someone explain...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. The system is horribly broken.

I suggest a fix: Every patent you are granted is free. Every patent that you are denied costs you. The cost is a sliding scale, the faster the patent office finds a triviality, or previous art, the more it costs the customer. The pantent office has to give the reasons why the patent was rejected, along with the bill. This should a) give the patent office some money, b) reduce the patentload, which means more time per patent for patent office. This creates a balance; patent office has to reject shittty patents to get money, but they have to keep granting good patents, orherwise people will stop filing (which might be a win for society in itself), and they are out of a job.

Re:Can someone explain...

[Maritz]

I suggest a fix: Every patent you are granted is free. Every patent that you are denied costs you.

They're granting everything that lands on their desk.

Re:Can someone explain...

[Anonymous Coward]

That's the point. When the patent office is an office that needs to make money, granting everything means they don't make any money. Where as actually doing their job examining the patents would make them money from all the crap patents they can reject.

Kinda like paying your test department for every bug they find, rather than paying them for how much code they can rubber stamp without finding any bugs. One encourages them to do their job, the other encourages them to not do their job.

Re:Can someone explain...

[Anonymous Coward]

This is the single most insightful comment I have read this month.

Indeed, this might just work! Definitely, anything might be better than the mess it is now, but this is good stuff. Keep on mentioning this idea, and hopefully someday it might stick!

-Evert- ( too lazy to go log in to get rid of AC )

Re:Can someone explain...

[StripedCow]

But then you get big companies taking the shotgun approach: many applications (they have much more money than independent inventors), and speculating on the patent office not being able to find prior art in some of them.

Re:Can someone explain...

[Anonymous Coward]

How about this for a fix: The first "x" number of patents are free to a company/individual. The next "y" number have some minimal cost to (a) apply for and (b) yearly maintain. After that, patent application and yearly maintenance cost more than a minimal cost.

So you end up having something like:
Patent #0 through 50: Free to apply for and maintain.
Patent #50 through 250: $100 application fee and $25 yearly renewal to maintain your patent.
Patents #250+: $1000 application fee $250 yearly renewal.

Patent hoarding should decrease. It may not stop all of the patent trolls since they can still have their portfolios of 50 free patents they can sue on, but those patents should end up being one's they feel are important enough to keep. The others would either need to be sold off or would lapse if the yearly fee is not paid. The same goes for the "innovation companies". They would have to either keep the patents they feel are important or have to pay to have a large portfolio or patents. This would provide a revenue stream to the patent office as well as cut down on petty patents.
The biggest caveat in this is to make sure the rules are such that a single person/company cannot create 100 shell companies to get around these rules.

Re:Can someone explain...

[geekoid]

It would be if it was remotely true.

Re:Can someone explain...

[losfromla]

No, the proposed solution still works. The shotgun approach would bite them that much harder as the patent office, now being an adversarial player would work hard to make revenue and would see these shotgun filings as a rich and easily minable source of revenue. It would force companies to actually do prior art searches to make sure that patent applications didn't end up costing more than they would ever be worth. Essentially it would cause a lot self-restraint even in the psychopathic individuals that corporations are, it would make them almost human. Excellent suggestion AC!

Re:Can someone explain...

[StripedCow]

Okay. But now the problem is to get people in Congress to actually pass and implement this.

(Which may be a much harder task than actually coming up with this solution!)

Re:Can someone explain...

[operagost]

Nope, patent examiners have a union. They can't strike, but they'll make sure Congress and the President keep the status quo.

Re:Can someone explain...

[Anomalyst]

you need to add a penalty multiplier based on the previous number of rejections in X timeframe by the submitter, something logarithmic is recommended. captcha=backstop

New Law Idea?

[Anonymous Coward]

This patent would cover every GPS with a display of time to destination. Including those in airlplanes. Of course airplanes had Delco Carousel which was an Inertial navigation system that included many GPS like features such as way points, time to destination, etc. Anyway my new law would be one that made it so that if a patent case is brought against a small company but that patent is clearly being violated by several larger companies. The small company should be able to differ the suit under that bases that none of the larger companies have yet reach a licensing deal or lost a patent case. This would end almost all of these patent trolls because they know they can't win a case against Google or even Garmin. I don't have legal degree to write it properly but I think someone could this and run with.

--zerodata

Re:New Law Idea?

[zippthorne]

The problem is that anyone who has gone through the effort and expense of obtaining a law degree will want to use it to make a profit, and something like what you describe would, by design, reduce opportunities for this.

Re:New Law Idea?

[meerling]

Yes.
ETA (Estimated Time of Arrival) has been used since long before we had computers.
Linking a patent to doing an ETA calculation based on location/vector data from a GPS is kind of like getting a patent for shoes if the cows the leather was made out of were grass fed.

Re:New Law Idea?

[geekoid]

And we have been opening and closing doors for centuries, does that mean if I invent a door that detect you are approaching it with intent to walk through it* I should be able to patent the system I use to create it? WE have been using cars for 100 years, if I invent a anti-grav car should I be allowed to patent it?

*see: Star Trek

Re:New Law Idea?

[Anonymous Coward]

You patent the detector, or the antigrav device. You shouldn't be allowed to patent the obvious combination of the detector and the door or the antigrav device and the car.

Larry should go after the PTO for issuing a patent

[Anonymous Coward]

... for hardship. Sue for a billion $ to make sure it doesn't happen again.

Legal costs and more

[mendax]

You know, it's all well and good that these trolls can be forced to pay legal costs and other damages, but it really ought to be illegal to knowingly enforce a bad patent. The lawyers prosecuting these suits can be referred to the bar for disciplinary action. If lawyers started to be disbarred or even fined by the courts, the latter is within the power of the court, these things would stop very fast.

Re:Legal costs and more

[Teancum]

What you are looking for here is something related to barratry. I wish such a concept actually applied in U.S. federal courts, although there are several states that have become enlightened enough that it does apply to those state court systems.

Even more important, I wish judges would actually enforce such a concept and disbar those who abuse the system. Unfortunately, in the "real world" you don't tend to find things so clear cut and lawyers being complete jerks. Usually they know at what point they are going to cross over the line and try to stay on the proper side of that line, even if they may tend to push those limits from time to time. It takes a real idiot of a lawyer who doesn't know the laws of their own profession.

Re:Legal costs and more

[wiredlogic]

The next step down from barratry is to pursue disciplinary action from the relevant bar association. Being good-ol-boys clubs the end result will less satisfying than disbarment but you could still inflict some pain on a deserving shark.

Re:First

[Anonymous Coward]

tl;dr

Do it right, canucks

[oldhack]

Waterboard the clowns. If you don't know how, send them over to us and we'll take care of them at Gitmo.

Re:Do it right, canucks

[Anonymous Coward]

Waterboarding doesnt work with trolls.

Fire or acid is the best method for dealing with them. Personally, I would go with a mixture of NAPthenic acid, PALMitic acid, and some form of accelerant, such as petrol.

Re:Do it right, canucks

[flyingfsck]

It is a Canadian case. You'll have to snow board them.

Re:Do it right, canucks

[Anonymous Coward]

Trolls and their lawers should be given a choice, pay one million plus legal costs to each person or company they annoyed or pay only legal costs but get tarred-and-feathered. The courts should lean towards the tarred-and-feathered punishment because it would give trolls and lawers something to remember for a long time. Getting smeared with tar then covered with feathers would be very hard to remove without taking a lot of skin off. Justice would be sweet !

Patent Troll should have known better

[tonfagun]

Hardly surprising. Even a patent troll should know better than going after a guy whose name translates to The Dark Man.

Okay, I admit, I added the definite article for effect, but the rest is true. Source: I'm German

Re:Patent Troll should have known better

[Anonymous Coward]

OH! I am sorry *hugs*

Sensible long term thinking.

[91degrees]

It's short sighted for others not to do this. If you give in to extortion, then surely that just opens you up to futher extortion.

Re:Larry should go after the PTO for issuing a pat

[sjames]

Mod parent up!

The patent office was derelict in it's duty AND fraudulently represented to both the plaintiff and defendant that the patent was valid even though it had (obviously) given it no more than a cursory glance. As a result, both sides ended up in a needless court battle.

Multiply by every stupid patent lawsuit anywhere.

Crowdfunding against patent trolls.

[gmpassos]

How about a crowdfunding site only to fight back patent trolls?

Not to be that Internet Toughguy

[wadeal]

But if I were a struggling developer or such and had a patent troll try this on me, with the only option to defend myself at my cost with no real hope of getting money back, I'd be very inclined to instead find the people behind this and make it very clear they wouldn't see a cent.

Why has this not happened yet? I want to see that news story, just to send a message to the rest of these vampires.

I have some variation on that

[Anonymous Coward]

- You apply for a patent.

- The problem statement (without your solution) is presented to ten independent experts versed on the subject matter (they get paid appropriately for that, see below).

- Note the number of experts which've come up with a solution infringing on your patent (this number will be higher the more obvious/well-known your solution to the problem is). Let this be n

- You are due a base price (say 100 dollars) times 4^n (i.e. if no expert touched your solution, it's 100 dollars, if all 10 experts hit, it's ~100 million. Besides, for n>=5 you don't get granted the patent (but you still have to cough up the money).

Unlikely to get court/lawyer costs awarded

[Zontar_Thing_From_Ve]

In the USA, the plaintiff is extremely unlikely to get court and attorney fees awarded, even when the other side has been a complete douchebag. My best friend is an attorney and he explained to me that judges almost never award court and attorney costs, even when the lawsuit should never have happened, because they are afraid that doing so will make people afraid of bringing legitimate cases to court because they might have to pay the other side's fees if they lose. Yes, fees are awarded sometimes in very egregious cases, but these are the exception.

Except Marshall, TX

[Macchendra]

We should draw up versions of all the popular software licenses, (MIT, BSD, GPL, etc.) that specifically exclude the patent troll town of Marshall, TX or even Harrison county, where many of the patent trolls file because of their "plaintiff friendly" juries. The town has benefited from all of the trolling, and they've set themselves up a little local industry for it. Let them do it without software. Maybe name it the Yee-Haw(R) license.

Good on him, but...

[danknight48]

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/technology/took+patent+troll/8921261/story.html
"Dunkelman doesn't charge for his popular BusBuddy app, but it does include some advertising, which grosses him about $200 a month. If you factor in the cost of computers, programming software and the rest of his expenses, he figures it makes "a few dollars. That's it: a few dollars." It would take years to pay Dovden's $10,000 claim."

"He hired lawyer Geoff North"

Pull the other one lol.
But fair play to him, regardless.

Tiny Victory

[skywire]

Sadly, this case never reached the merits of the troll's ludicrous patent on the obvious.

Careful. This might be a "hate" crime

[RogueWarrior65]

Larry might want to proceed with caution because some patent trolls would have us believe that calling them patent trolls is a "hate crime" and therefore punishable by a huge fine payable to said patent trolls.

http://boingboing.net/2013/09/17/patent-trolls-lumen-view-ca.html

Re:Larry should go after the PTO for issuing a pat

[geekoid]

If you are a lawyer, and I come to you and say a person has violated my patent how is the lawyer going to know it's valid or not?
In fact from the lawyers point of view it is perfect valid becasue the person has a legal patent.

Not defending the original trolls, but...

[Dogtanian]

or even better kill them, put it on tape and post it on liveleak - it has to be as violent as possible, but once you kill a couple of these trolls rest assured the rest of them will disappear quickly. Violence is the only answer.

I find your ideas intriguing, and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

It's a feel-good story, but that's all

[WOOFYGOOFY]

It's a feel-good story, but that's all. Just like the stories of Linux devs fighting patents before they're approved, it doesn't represent a formula to solve the problem.

The only solution is to do as NZ has done and ban software patents.

The problem is that the ideas in software patents are exactly like the ideas in novels plots. They're abstract, although made concrete within the context of a novel. They represent ideas which, if not merely derivative certainly do nothing more than draw on a literal ocean of unrealized possibilities composed of well known facts about the world. Then they put them together in surprising and useful ways.

\What software patents do is assert that since not every possibility in that sea has been realized (how could they ever be? We'd run out of time merely trying to enumerate them so merely to save them from being patented..) , everything in it still "uncaught" is another patent waiting to happen.

Novelists think up new plot ideas by recombining old ones and inventing surprising twists or somehow re-contextualizing them. The result is something great, that no one has really seen before, although in retrospect it was always there waiting to be plucked out. But this is exactly what software is also.

Every day, any decent software dev has 10 new "patentable" ideas, just the way novelists have new thoughts about plot and characters and character descriptions and all the rest of what goes into writing.

The bottom line is software patents are patents on thoughts, on ideas. The real "contribution" of software patents is to introduce into the law a definition of "patentable thing" which is so abstract as to accommodate absolutely any human activity whatsoever.

If patents attorneys and their hopefuls had been around when the modern novel was taking form, they would have applied patent law to fiction writing itself.

Not just one man

[exxaminer]

Few hours ago, I read how O'Connor fights for FindTheBest.. $1M pledge for $50k settlement demand? ..a ripple effect I guess? Or hope..

Canada

[garyoa1]

Canada isn't the the USA. Frivolous lawsuits are essentially illegal. If you're going to take anyone to court you may be opening one helluva can of worms for yourself.

Property Seizure

[phorm]

So why not seize the property of the scammers?
Mobile phones. Computer equipment. I'm sure there are lots of "proceeds of crime" or "items used in the commission of a crime" to be found...

Finding the troll!

[billstewart]

Patent trolls can't hide quite as well as spammers can, because somebody has to actually own the patent, though they can wrap their trolling in a shell corporation that doesn't have any assets because it passes any winnings on to its owners or parent corporation or something.

I once tracked a spammer to an address in Greenville Delaware, which is the office of The Company Corporation, the canonical place to get $99 Delaware corporations, so I figured it was a lost cause; their only assets would be a file folder in a lawyer's office, and if I sued them they'd just go bankrupt and have to spend another $99 getting a new shell corp.

Re:Finding the troll!

[Anonymous Coward]

If a shell company can be shown to be setup to prevent legal discovery you have a pretty good chance of getting a judge to agree to piercing the legal veil in order to find out who the people behind the curtain are.

Human evolutionary niches

[billstewart]

Actually there's been some research suggesting we had a niche for a while scavenging leopard kills, back when we were just apes. Leopards tend to cache their kills in trees so they can eat some now and save the rest for later, and we could steal some of that, especially since opposable thumbs were good for cracking open skulls to get the yummy braaainzzz. So when your cat's begging for scraps from your dinner, give him some, his ancestors earned it.

loser pays

[gzuckier]

Assuming the suit is in Canada, their legal system is loser pays the winner's costs, unlike the US, so extortion via groundless suits is less attractive as a career.