Slashdot Mirror
Martha Stewart Out To Exterminate Patent Troll Lodsys
McGruber writes "Gigaom's Jeff John Roberts reports that Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia, Inc. (MSLO) has filed a lawsuit against Lodsys, a shell company that gained infamy two years ago by launching a wave of legal threats against small app makers, demanding they pay for using basic internet technology like in-app purchases or feedback surveys. In the complaint filed this week in federal court in Wisconsin, Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia asked a judge to declare that four magazine iPad apps are not infringing Lodsys' patents, and that the patents are invalid because the so-called inventions are not new. The complaint explained how Lodsys invited the company to 'take advantage of our program' by buying licenses at $5,000 apiece. It also calls the Wisconsin court's attention to Lodsys' involvement in more than 150 Texas lawsuits. In choosing to sue Lodsys and hopefully crush its patents, Martha Stewart is choosing a far more expensive option than simply paying Lodsys to go away."
....out of nowhere I have a heck of a lot more respect for Martha Stewart.
It's like MAGIC!
Turns out patent trolls may actually be good for something.
And that's a good thing.
It's a *GOOD* thing...
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
martha don't fuck around
Lodsys has finally encountered the perfect enemy - Queen bitch, completely self-absorbed, and very, very wealthy. Martha Stewart not only has the money, power, and influence to defend herself, but if she has taken personal offense to their tactics, she won't stop until she has completely and utterly destroyed Lodsys.
Yay!
Patents are broken, Maybe an attack from this co. will help speed up the demise of US patent law for good.
It's only for the rich and powerful to abuse!
Wouldn't you know it, Lodsys is one of Myhrvold's shell entities.
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
For USD $5000, I'll see to it that Martha Stewart won't visit you.
... she seems to do the right thing.
Caught for insider trading? Goes to jail and takes it like a man (so to speak).
Unjustified patent lawsuit filed against her? Takes out the trash.
Go Martha go-bble, yum, sorry, can't speak with my mouth full. Mouth watering. Delicious. Wow!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Look at Myrhvold and he just plain old LOOKS shady. I hope Martha Stewart can bring his extortion ring down a notch. Of course, to solve the patent trolling of myrhvold, the Feds need to change the judges and magistrates in the East Texas District Court. I have always wondered why cases are there when parent companies are in Canada or Ca or Washington, etc. Never liked Martha Stewart, but, YOU GO GIRL
It seems to me that congress needs to revise the rules for obtaining and holding patents. I think that if the subject being patented can be recreated simply by having seen it in action or by a reading of the requirements, then it does not deserve a patent. So stuff like one-click or side to unlock would be excluded. There needs to be real hard work put forth on something before it should be considered an invention. We need to stop patenting mere ideas and obvious stuff. The hard work part should not be based on how hard the patent holder worked, but on how hard a challenger to the patent would have to work. I do think a good system of rules would be hard to develop. The system should not be easily gamed. If it proves too difficult to write such a set of rules, then it seems to me that having a patent system is bad idea. Furthermore, most all inventions are going to be incremental improvements. Most fields have lots of people working in them. So if the increment of improvement is small and there are many people in the field, then clearly it won't be much work for others to achieve the same result, and hence the first to file concept seems grossly unfair. So now you have to decide what is a significant enough increment for something to warrant a patent. Perhaps if you have a mind like Tesla one could truly invent something stunning, but even then I have my doubts, for every Tesla there seems to a Marconi.
They went after the National Association of Realtors. The fifth largest all-time donor to federal politicians since 1989.
When big political donors get upset, politicians will act.
It may cost more. But maybe she's also considering the principal of the matter. She could be thinking "this might cost me some money, but those (whatever language older....so nice women use) SOBs shouldn't get away with this". Plus it might give other trolls the idea that going after patents/sueing for bullshit claims may not always end in their favor. Kudos to her!
Indoctrinate : to instruct especially in fundamentals or rudiments Educate : to develop mentally, morally, or aestheti
This is an example of long-term thinking.
People only look at their personal short-term gain, with no thought about the long-term consequences. It's paying the Danegeld, nothing less.
I read all the time about this-or-that injustice and oh! the outrage it sparks, but no one wants to do the right thing and fight because it's so hard!
When a cop violates your civil rights, do you take him to court? If no one does, then cops feel free to do whatever they want, and rights violations are everywhere.
When the BSA (business software alliance) demands to search your office without a warrant, when the RIAA offers to settle for less than the court costs, when the border patrol stops and searches your car, or when patent trolls demand license fees, it's all the same: bullies feel free to operate, it's the Danegeld in another form.
If people stood up for their rights and took the bullies to task, there would be a lot less bullying. It would be expensive for the first few people, but in the long run it would be better for everyone. Consider it an investment in your childrens' future: if you fight now, they won't have to fight later.
Next time you read about an injustice, think about what the victim could do to take the bullies to task. Then ask "why didn't they do that?"
You make a good point about the approval from the top, however calculating the 'greater loss' can be complex, especially if you're considering long term. Sort of like how many/most companies today will fight 'frivolous' lawsuits to the hilt - it's more expensive in the short term, against that litigator, yes, but in the long run if you're seen as a target you face so many more lawsuits it's actually cheaper to fight.
I don't read AC A human right
I want one!
and gets apped.
Plus it might give other trolls the idea that going after patents/sueing for bullshit claims may not always end in their favor. Kudos to her!
In the bigger picture, it will only make a difference if the people responsible for Lodsys's antics are held personally responsible. Otherwise a troll isn't really going to care if their company goes under as long as they walk away with some money in the meantime.
That french chef is a looser, there is a big base there, no need to burn any books. Just walk inside and its warm.
What a doofus, the base is not french either haha.
Besides special meals, who eats french stuff daily? and french fries are not it.
And btw, Marthas history is Polish, so maybe the French dont like the Eastern Europe food.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
So its ok for the feds to lie to us, for fbi to lie, for Obama to lie, its ok for all politicians to lie to everyone daily.
Hey feds, the sky is red. Arrest me.
All of the SEC is spineless and corrupt and a in cahoots with the corp elite.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
The temperature on the river Styx must have plummeted. I have found respect for respect for Martha Stewart Living. What next, a rational health plan from tea baggers?
Who puts out a hit on the execs of the troll company
When it comes to patent trolls, you have not only to get their planes, but also target their parachutes. Total war.
They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
Martha the Troll Killer
Wild image in head of two lawyers chained together at feet. Lawyer nunchuks .
Patent trolls can only be held personally responsible if they were established as a sole proprietorship. That's not very likely. Sue a corporation, and the worst that will happen is it files for bankruptcy. Even assholes have legal protections.
At the heart of the patent licensing issue is the relatively unlimited ability of the patent holder to ask for exhorbitant patent license fees.
To turn that around, the legal design problem is to define a reasonable statutory patent license fee that can reasonably fit with the public purpose of the Constitution's patent clauses.
Taking the F.O.B. wholesale price of any product (such as a cell phone or computer), I think the fair statutory patent license fee is 1.5%. That 1.5% would be shared equally with each of the agents for each patent listed in the headerfile or nameplate. If the product is free software, no fee is collected. If somebody sells the software, then the 1.5% fee would be due.
Why is the the patent license fee so low? The novelty of a patent is over when it is published. Patents in the software and business systems realm deteriorate as fast as any business software system. Massive parallel re-invention is very common because of the many documentation types and source code languages used to describe software and business systems. Reciprocally, massive over claiming of patents is very common because any patent attorney can add plausible extension language to any patent no matter how limited or constrained the scope of the original reduction to practice.
I think it would be interesting if patents were treated a bit more like trademarks in that if you don't defend them you lose them. it may stop a few things from happening;
1. Waiting till a product gets widely accepted and then suing. If you don't sue withing a certain number of years the patent is dead.
2. Picking on the small guys who do not have the money to defend themselves. Require patent holder to sue all patent violators or the patent is dead.
The main issue is would the patent holder know about the infringement. In many cases it would be easy but harder in others. The second point would allow the target of the lawsuit to bring in other bigger players to help defend against bad patents.
"Lying" to a federal investigator. Right.
This was an FBI interview. The only record allowed at an FBI interview are the FBI's notes. You are not allowed any other record. So the record can say whatever they want it to say after the fact.
The fed's started this high profile case against her, for whatever reason, and made a huge media splash. When it turned out that she hadn't actually done anything wrong, they were about to be left looking stupid. Can't have that, can we? So they nailed her on this completely irrelevant charge of having said something incorrect, during an interview where the only record was the set of notes taken by the people interviewing her.
Even if the notes are accurate, what's with prosecuting someone for saying something incorrect? It may be a lie, it may be merely a mistake. You are not under oath, often the FBI intimidates people into giving interviews without their lawyers present. It's a sick business.
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
In-app purchases and feedback reviews aren't technologies, they are concepts.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
This is very good. The small fry that the trolls target cannot do this. Go Bite them hard!
In other words, patent trolls will now expend more effort on attacking the rest of us who are not phenomenally wealthy. Certainly Martha Stewart has every right to defend herself, and I'l probably cheer when she wins - but the outcome isn't really one we can be glad about.
This *is* the case with patents. read up on "laches"
The problem is that it costs significant sums of money to go into court to show that the holder did not diligently purse infringers.
Sadly, it does nothing to prevent another planeful from taking off. You need to target the airport that is allowing them to get off the ground in the first place: the patent system.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
If she gets the patents thrown out, that's good for everyone, rest of us included.
When it comes to patent trolls, you have not only to get their planes, but also target their parachutes
Google gets no hits on that phrase. Yours?
As always, all IMO. Insert "I think" everywhere grammatically possible.
Never cared for her, but this is the right thing to do and I have to admire it.
I simply liked her because most people I knew didn't. I'm an underdog contrarian that way.
I liked her a little more when she got railroaded into prison and kept her business going.
Now, I like her even more than that. I'm off to buy some of her sheets.
Then I'll masturbate to her putting me to bed in them after dominating sex, with a stern spanking and a fresh linen diaper that smells of lilac when I pee it.
It's the least I can do for her as a fan...
You don't have to be under oath. Lying to the police is a crime in itself, which is one of the main reasons you should never talk to the police. Even completely honest people make mistakes in speech.
The fed's started this high profile case against her,
The Fed's what, their greengrocer?
Even if the notes are accurate, what's with prosecuting someone for saying something incorrect?
It's a felony to lie to an investigator during an investigation, that's what. It was a stupid thing for her to do.
You are not under oath
If she were under oath it would have been perjury rather than obstruction of justice. Honestly, people, I'm neither a cop nor a lawyer an I know that. WTF?
Free Martian Whores!
It may cost more. But maybe she's also considering the principal of the matter.
That's what the GP said when he said "Sure, this one time action costs more than giving in, but it might be cheaper in the long run."
Or did you mean "principle?" If so, you didn't say what you thought you said. I'd think she was more concerned with the interest (the payback) rather than the principal (the cost).
Free Martian Whores!
> It's a felony to lie to an investigator during an investigation,
A lie in the moral sense of the term requires intent which is pretty difficult if not impossible to prove. So the entire idea is complete bullshit as the cops are free to lie or simply to disagree. Intent is not required. You can simply be imperfect (not even stupid or evil) and still run afoul of the law.
It's one of those "catch all laws" that really have no business being on the books in the first place. It's something that the authorities can accuse you of even if they can't pin anything else on you.
That's exactly what happened to Martha.
It's stupid to talk to a cop period. Everyone should take that to heart. The cops would deserve every bit of the consequences for being such fascists.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
...Lodsys feels the same way the rebels felt when the Death Star was looming over the corner of the planet?
Only difference is that the Rebels didn't have the Force, R2-D2's data, and the Empire had the smarts to cover up every exhaust port and hole on the Death Star.
Friend of ordinary devs , homemakers, and shortsellers everywhere!
there are four (4) requirements for an invention to be patentable; statutory, new, useful, non-obvious. In the case of Lodsys, I feel that their patent fails in the non-obvious requirement. After all, how can so many individuals, large and small companies design software that infringes on their patent. So many independent programmers came up with ideas for various software with varying implementations that infringed Lodsys' patent and that patent is considered to be non-obvious. I don't think so. On a side note, one should read some of the Lodsys' patent documentation. It's a bunch of nonsense. There is no code, and if I remember correctly, not even a flowchart. Personally, I think the patent office in the case of software patents has been issuing patents for ideas. Ideas cannot be patented. The implementation of the idea is what can be implemented. In software, there are several ways for an algorithm to be implemented. Software should be protected by trade secret similar to how the Coca-Cola formula is protected. After all, the way to make Coca-Cola is an algorithm. But Patent Assertion Entities (patent trolls) wont like this change as they cannot make any money as they are not in the business of creating products or software, there business is in licensing software and going after anyone they think is infringing whether they are or not. There is no cost to them as a successful defense cannot recover their court costs. Trolls should be made to pay everytime they lose a case, then maybe they'll think twice about suing.
New book in hardcover is $0.01 from Amazon. Seems like they are running presses around the clock to meet demand!
A lie in the moral sense of the term requires intent which is pretty difficult if not impossible to prove.
Sometimes, but the jury seemed to think she lied.
It's stupid to talk to a cop period.
Depending on circumstances, yes it is. I would have insisted on having my lawyer present.
Free Martian Whores!
Just to be clear, lying to the Feds is a felony, by itself; i.e., you can go to the fed pen even if what you lied about is not a crime.
And it doesn't have to be a lie per se. You misremember, your account doesn't jibe with someone else, you don't understand the question, you're confused, you're tired, you're sleepy.
Moreover, the only record of the conversation are the notes taken by the investigators. You're not allowed to record the conversation or take notes yourself.
Lying to the police is not a felony, but it's not going to win you any friends.
There's an old saying about knowing what's more expensive in the long run. It's "penny wise, pound foolish". Paying this patent troll to go away this time is cheaper than a lawsuit. How much cheaper is the lawsuit, though, than setting a precedent of being pushed around by patent trolls and paying them off?
Regardless of her attack's effect on patent trolls, look at its effect on us. Attacking them increases her personal popularity, which in turn enhances her brand.
[citation needed]
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
A person who knowingly makes a false or misleading material statement to a public servant is guilty of a gross misdemeanor.
- revised code of Washington, source. Just a sample.
Fucking funny how I did it and got away with it, then.
Not in the land of the free, mind.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
You go girl!
Create a pool of linked companies who offer to help pay the cost of fighting a patent troll. Basically, when they get contacted, ask the members if they are willing to help shut the troll down, as they might be next on the list. You get a thousand companies to agree and the price for each gets cheap. $5k for a license vs $1-2k into the pool to help kill the troll.
At the very least, one would think patent trolls would avoid suing any company that is known to have access to such backing and ready and willing to fight such things.
Prior to this, I refused to purchase Martha Stewart's products on principle. From now on, I will purchase Martha Stewart's products on principle.