Slashdot Mirror


Intellectual Ventures Sheds At Least Part of Its "Patent Troll" Reputation

pacopico writes Intellectual Ventures, the world's most infamous patent troll, has changed its tune — maybe. According to a story in Businessweek, the company has started turning a number of its ideas into products, ranging from hydration sensors to waterless washing machines and self-healing concrete. The story reveals some new tidbits about IV, including that it pays inventors $17,000 per idea, has a new start-up fund and that one of its cofounders got tossed out of school for hacking. IV is obvisouly trying to improve its reputation, but plenty of skeptics remain who think this is just a ruse meant to draw attention away from its patent lawsuits.

16 of 75 comments (clear)

  1. The only lesson to learn from this by i+kan+reed · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is that punishing patent trolls causes innovation.

    1. Re:The only lesson to learn from this by i+kan+reed · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What it matters is that it gets done. Patents exist for a limited time frame. Now there's a lot of economic harm that can happen in that time frame, but the hypothetical argument is that the long-term consequences of new ideas fostered by patents are positive.

      Are they actually beneficial? I'm as skeptical as anyone about it, and don't know how you'd even begin to measure it.
      But patent trolls being forced to design and build things? That is an undeniable situational improvement over the status quo.

    2. Re:The only lesson to learn from this by morgauxo · · Score: 2

      Ok, easy answer. You don't HAVE to build anything. But if you don't you have to at least make your patent available for licensing to someone who will. If you go too long without doing either you risk losing the patent. (you do get to appeal the loss of the patent, if there are special circumstances that delayed you doing something with it) Rather than patent trolls waiting to sue someone we should have patent houses with open catalogs that anyone can browse and buy licenses. Actually, I was tempted to say that having your patent available for someone to buy licenses is enough to show you are doing something with it and therefore you get to keep it. I don't think that would work though because trolls could just price the license too high on purpose and go back to pouncing and suing.

      No armchair lawyers, I know this isn't how it works. I am speaking hypothetically about how it COULD work, maybe even how it SHOULD work. Hell, anything is better than how it actually "works" today!

    3. Re:The only lesson to learn from this by i+kan+reed · · Score: 2

      That's what IV does.

      They license their patents.

      And sue. They do both. So we've come full circle.

  2. This is not new information by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 5, Informative

    When This American Life did its expose on Intellectual Ventures' activities a few years ago, IV talked about their labs and made many claims that the money was being used to fund innovation and create new products - a claim that did not stand up to even a modicum of scrutiny.

    Basically IV is just trying to find a new patsy to listen to its same old song. Welcome to the show, Business Week!

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  3. Mosquito laser by dfsmith · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So can I get a laser mosquito blaster in time for my next party?

  4. Intellectual Vultures? by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 5, Funny

    Seriously, why don't they just change their name to Intellectual Vultures? I'd at least respect them for their honesty.

  5. If IV make products, where are these products? by erice · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The article mentioned a handful of startups but there is no mention of any of these startups actually producing a product that people can buy. If you actually could buy a product or service from an Intellectual Ventures backed company this would be a powerful affirmation that IV is a real contributor and not just a troll.

    That this PR piece makes no mention of such a product, making it very clear this has not happened. I expect this will never happened. IV startups are not meant to produce and sell product. They are meant to be bought out and bought out for a much larger sum than IV could get from just licensing the IP.

    Now, there is nothing wrong with a startup selling out before it can bring it's product to market but it is a little bit dishonest to plan it that way.

    Which, I suppose is an improvement over IV's normal policy of simply sitting on technology until a practicing entity re-invents it and then suing them. Still, it is a long way from showing that the world is better with Intellectual Ventures than without them.

  6. In defense of Patent Trolls by IcyHando'Death · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I know patent trolls are about as popular here as child molesters, but here I am, coming to their defense..,

    Suppose you are the inventor of something marvelous, like say, intermittent windshield wipers. You are not likely to have the capital to start your own car company, so how do you monetize your invention? You do the obvious: approach the existing car companies about licensing. Now, if you don't happen to know the story of Rober Kearns, you may want to look him up, but the TL;DR version is that if you are not ready to spend years and $MILLIONS in court, the giants will just steam roll right over you, taking your invention with them.

    Enter the "patent troll".

    Patent trolls are your key to monetizing your invention. They have the expertise and the money to see a court case through. They are not producers themselves so the multi-nationals can't shut them down using their own patent portfolios. If the patent is a good one, they stand a real chance of winning in court and they compete against each other for such opportunities, so they form an alternative market where your invention can fetch you a tidy sum. They will expect a discount obviously; they assume a substantial risk, after all, due to the uncertain nature of litigation.

    The facts that patent trolls don't invent anything and don't make anything are often held up here on Slashdot as reasons to deride these companies. These are red herrings. Many companies exist which perform valuable functions in society without doing either of these things. Patent trolls are among them.

    I will grant that there have been some absurd patent cases ltigated by patent trolls, but that's a separate issue. If anybody's reputation should suffer for these absurdities, it should be the patent office's. The troll is just doing its duty by its investors to run a profitable company by obtaining maximum value for its patent assests.

    1. Re:In defense of Patent Trolls by IcyHando'Death · · Score: 2

      I should note that the above argument is about "patent trolls" in general. I don't know the particulars about Intellectual Ventures.

    2. Re:In defense of Patent Trolls by Skarjak · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I don't see how that changes anything. As far as i'm concerned, if you go to one of these patent trolls instead of trying to develop a product, you are indeed slowing down innovation. If a company independently has the same idea and actually tries to do something with it, I don't think they should owe you anything. How exactly did the original "inventor" contribute to society and technology? There is no valuable function being served here. Just someone who came up with an idea, and rather than doing something with it, figures he's just gonna leech money from people who have the same idea later on.

    3. Re:In defense of Patent Trolls by MattGWU · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Their patents aren't 'patent for intermittent windshield wipers' complete with schematics. Their patents are for 'device, method, or process to remove liquids from a surface which may or may not need to be glass in a manner TBD'.

      --
      "These people look deep within my soul and assign me a number based on the order in which I joined" --Homer re:
    4. Re:In defense of Patent Trolls by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 2

      Interesting. Have you done any licensing deals (as inventor or licensee) with IV? I have. At the time, it was $10,000 per invention filed. Oh, and 15% of the gross revenue for any license fees they receive for that patent (or, if a group of patents, like 100, you get 15% of 1/100th of the total licensing fee paid)

      So far, of the few I've gotten with IV (started doing some work with them back in 2008, in areas outside my normal area of expertise), one has been licensed and I do get a nice annual check from them. I'm not sure how I see this is a downside as I was able to get paid for creating in an area I wasn't working, and continue to do so. Kind of like this normal thing called "work", except for my off-hours tinkering in other fields.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    5. Re:In defense of Patent Trolls by amaurea · · Score: 2

      How many of those who are paying license fees or settlements to intellectual ventures for your patent (and indirectly paying you) had read your patent before infringing on it? If they hadn't, how does you and intellectual ventures being paid help society or speed up innvoation in any way? If it were me receiving money from intellectual ventures, I would feel pretty bad about it.

  7. Re:THere still isn't any reason by morgauxo · · Score: 2

    Patent trolls aren't small inventors. They are groups of rich people hiding behind paper corporations. They buy their patents from others. Then they do nothing with them. They only sue those who later come up with the same idea. The whole point of the patent system was to act as an incentive for people to come up with, make use of and ultimately publicize their ideas. This was to keep technology progressing to benefit us all. The whole point of a patent troll is to extract money from people who actually try to make a product. Patent trolls hurt us all.

    If YOU are a small inventor and you have a good idea you cannot implement yourself then by all means, sell it to someone who can and will. Don't feel entitled to become instantly rich. The hard work is going to be in testing, implementing and marketing the idea. We already established that you will not be doing that. If it's good then you should be able to expect a nice pay day though. If you think the world owes you free lunch for life just because you came up with an idea which you will now jealously gaurd and make sure the world (now paying your way) doesn't benefit from that idea for the next 20 years... well screw you then!

  8. Re:THere still isn't any reason by Copid · · Score: 2

    I'd rather see the expiration for patents depend on whether they're actually being implemented or not. Coming up with a new idea is great, but only if something actually comes out of it. If you can't get somebody to license and build it in a reasonable number of years, all the patent is really doing is cluttering up the idea space for companies that are inventing things in-house with the actual intent of building them.

    Right now, every time a company comes up with a cool new invention, they have to search through mountains of patents to see if somebody, somewhere has done it before and is just sitting on the patent. A system that puts a greater burden on inventors who bring things to market than on inventors who don't is not balanced correctly. Maintaining a patent monopoly should require continuous effort to put that idea to work in something useful.

    --
    An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"