Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Wins $1.3 Million From Patent Troll

Posted by timothy on from the may-the-bridge-collapse-upon-you-and-your-family dept.

An anonymous reader writes Earlier this year, Google sued Beneficial Innovations for breach of contract, ostensibly in defense of its Doubleclick ad technology clients against whom Beneficial Innovations had filed suits despite Google having already paid licensing fees for the technology. Following Google's jury trial win, the company was originally awarded only 'nominal damages of $1 and a judicial order stopping Beneficial from going after more Doubleclick customers.' Now, however, the presiding judge has ruled that Google is entitled to some attorneys' fees in the amount of $1.3 million (PDF).

14 of 35 comments (clear)

  1. Judicial Order by wisnoskij · · Score: 2

    So you need a judicial order now to stop lawyers from suing people who have paid to use someone patents?

    --
    Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    1. Re:Judicial Order by i+kan+reed · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Short version: yes, how else are you going to practically enforce that provision?

      The long version touches on due process, and how summary dismissals aren't enough of a disincentive, but I think if you tried to imagine the full narrative yourself, you'd see the same problems.

    2. Re:Judicial Order by Dragonslicer · · Score: 2

      Assuming the summary is correct (I'm not new here, I swear), you need to read more carefully. The jury made it so that Google's clients couldn't be sued for infringing patents that Google had already paid to license. The judicial order was simply for Google to receive attorneys' fees.

    3. Re:Judicial Order by i+kan+reed · · Score: 2

      People who continuously pay $1.3 million settlements can't afford lawyers and court fees after a while.

    4. Re:Judicial Order by wiredlogic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The incentive is to prosecute the troll lawyers for barratry. Too bad DAs only selectively administer the law when it comes to keeping their colleagues in line.

      --
      I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
    5. Re:Judicial Order by Charliemopps · · Score: 4, Interesting

      assuming they ever pay. I've been involved in a few court ordered settlements before and have never seen a penny. In all cases the offender simply made it more expensive to get the money than the money was worth. It's a very easy thing to do. It's unfortunately Judges aren't more sympathetic in these sorts of cases.

    6. Re: Judicial Order by jd2112 · · Score: 4, Funny

      I don't think Google would even notice $1.3M. I'm sure their nazgul legal team will spare no expense to see that these trolls pay every penny so that other trolls think twice before trying to rip off Google out its customers.

      --
      Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
  2. Is this really a win? by MobyDisk · · Score: 3, Insightful

    despite Google having already paid licensing fees for the technology.

    Since Google is paying the patent troll licensing fees, this doesn't sound much like a win.

    The article also doesn't explain why someone would sue even though they were being paid. Did Beneficial Innovations (OMG, even the name is trolling) not realize these customers were covered?

    1. Re:Is this really a win? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      The article also doesn't explain why someone would sue even though they were being paid. Did Beneficial Innovations (OMG, even the name is trolling) not realize these customers were covered?

      If I'm reading the follow through articles right, Google and Beneficial reached an agreement about Google using the patents. This included terms about Google's customers using Google products based on those patents. Beneficial tried to argue that some organisations were using the patent-involving products outside the terms of the agreement with Google, and so were violating the patents themselves. They tried to sue those organisations, so Google stepped in to slap them down.

  3. Not really over patents by Theaetetus · · Score: 5, Informative
    This was a breach of contract suit over a settlement between Google and Beneficial, under which Beneficial wasn't supposed to bring infringement suits against Google customers. They did, hence the breach. The settlement included a provision under which a prevailing party could get attorney's fees after a breach, and this was just the judge awarding those fees.

    That's not to say that there aren't people winning money from patent trolls - there are, in other cases, and the lower standard for awarding fees to the defendant is a result of the Supreme Court's decision in Octane Fitness last April. But this isn't one of those - this is more like Google suing the guy who paints the fences at the Googleplex for doing a shitty job, and then getting attorney's fees under their existing contract.

    1. Re:Not really over patents by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 2

      Google paid the [legal] protection money for its affiliates, and the racket still smashed in the windows of the affiliates' shops.

      Any two-bit thug can tell you how that works out.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  4. That's all? by mbone · · Score: 2

    Just $ 1.3 million for attorney's fees? And I've been telling clients they should have $ 3 million set aside for fees if they want to pursue a patent lawsuit.

    But, I guess this is more breach of contract than a real patent suit, so maybe the "low" fees aren't too surprising.

  5. Re:Against a *doubleclick* technique by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 2

    So we let douchebags get away with being douchebags because we don't like the douchebags they're being douchebags to?

    What could possibly go wrong?

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  6. found money by Cardoor · · Score: 2

    google winning a $1.3mm award is like you or me finding a crumpled $5 bill on the ground on the way to the liquor store