Slashdot Mirror
US Supreme Court: Patent Holders Must Prove Infringment
jfruh writes "The Supreme Court issued a ruling that might help marginally curb patent madness. Ruling on a case between Medtronic and Mirowski Family Ventures, the court rules that the burden of proof in patent infringement cases is always on the patent holder. This is true even in the specific case at hand, in which Medtronic sought a declaratory judgement that it was not violating the Mirowski patents."
Now Google can fight MS in regards to their claims of Patent Infringenment in Android and force them to prove it. If they fail, then MS is going to be out lots of money for the licenses they've charged for.
Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
I am not a fan of the current patenting system, but this is BS, a patent application costs $10,000
LOL...if someone is charging you $10K to file it for you, then you are getting ripped off.
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/qs/ope/fee010114.htm
If you sue someone for patent infringement you have always had the burden of proof, even before this ruling. All this ruling is saying is that if you threaten to sue someone, and they go to a judge first asking you to put-up or shut-up, the burden is still on you as the patent holder, same as if you had sued them.
Secondly, this ruling does nothing to limit the discovery process. As a small inventor suing a big company you still have the same subpoena powers during discovery as you did before.
In other words, the Supreme Court simply reaffirmed that accused infringers are innocent until proven guilty, regardless of the procedural nuances of how the lawsuit is initiated. None of the concerns you voiced will become worse due to this ruling.