Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Crazy Patent Troll Suing Devs For Posting Apps To Google Play (technobuffalo.com)

Posted by msmash on from the crossing-the-line dept.

Developer Austin Meyer is fighting back patent trolls after he was sued for putting his flight simulator app called X-Plane on Google Play. TechnoBuffalo reports: A few years ago, he uploaded the app to the Google Play Store and was very unexpectedly hit with a lawsuit from Uniloc in 2012. The firm claims it patented the idea behind the app market. That's right, Uniloc isn't going after Meyer for making a flight simulator; it's going after any company that uses Google Play. It's already targeted a bunch of other popular apps, including Minecraft. So Meyer did a bit of digging and discovered a few pretty shocking details. It turns out the judge in that district may have a direct relationship with the prosecuting lawyer in many of these cases. The judge, Leonard Davis, is apparently known for almost never throwing out patent lawsuits. Meyer claims that his son, Bo Davis, is the lawyer representing many of these patent trolls.

85 of 108 comments (clear)

  1. Judge Davis retired last year by dgatwood · · Score: 5, Informative

    According to Wikipedia, Judge Davis retired from the eastern district of Texas a year ago. Why is he still hearing cases?

    Yes, if true, there's a potential conflict of interest there, and it could explain a lot about why the eastern district of Texas is so amazingly pro-patent-troll, but at this point, it is water under the bridge. It would have been nice to have known that five or ten years ago; there are a number of ways that the problem could have been resolved, up to and including removing the judge in question if he didn't recuse himself from cases tried by his son going forward. But now that he's retired, there's nothing that can be done, and either the problem has been resolved (in which case he was the problem) or it hasn't (in which case he wasn't).

    --

    Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    1. Re:Judge Davis retired last year by DamonHD · · Score: 1

      Or there is more than one problem, of which he may have been one, which seems most likely.

      Rgds

      Damon

      --
      http://m.earth.org.uk/
    2. Re:Judge Davis retired last year by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      The trolls usually lose on appeal anyway. So really, it's just a question of whether that's sufficient grounds to sue for lawyer fees. The statute of limitations has probably run out for most of those cases. The statute of limitations for legal malpractice in Texas is only two years, I think.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    3. Re:Judge Davis retired last year by mysidia · · Score: 5, Interesting

      But now that he's retired, there's nothing that can be done, and either the problem has been resolved (in which case he was the problem) or it hasn't (in which case he wasn't).

      What do you mean? Retirement does not mean you are no longer subject to the possibility of disciplinary action by the ethics enforcement body.

      Also, if they figure out that his son was the prosecution on all these cases, and a clear conflict of interest wasn't even disclosed...:

      It can generate a cause for appeal, and possible charges against the former judge.

      That might even result in some settlements being cancelled and prior rulings overturned, Although, I doubt one judge and one lawyer were allowed to do THAT much damage...

      One of the big company defendants' investigation teams surely would have noticed any pattern like that, right?

    4. Re:Judge Davis retired last year by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Informative

      By which point the victims have spent tens of thousands of dollars. This is a very serious problem, and one that has significant costs for the economy. If there is also corruption involved, then why isn't the judge and his son now being interviewed by state of Federal law enforcement? There's no way any of this ethical, and almost certainly it has to be illegal.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    5. Re:Judge Davis retired last year by sjames · · Score: 2

      This isn't a case of malpractice, it's judicial misconduct.

    6. Re:Judge Davis retired last year by FirstOne · · Score: 1

      :First this conduct would be covered under federal jurisdiction and various bar associations.. I can think of number of different federal laws being broken, and the statute of limitations for conspiracy tolls from the last overt act. I.E. Yearly royalty payment to the patent troll.

      Thus both this federal judge, his son and the principles of patent troll co could be in deep dodo..

    7. Re:Judge Davis retired last year by cdrudge · · Score: 4, Informative

      No, it's not that there is more than one. It's the same one. Knowledge of the relationship isn't new. It was mentioned in this article from 2012 and specifically points out any case would be assigned to another judge.

    8. Re:Judge Davis retired last year by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      By which point the victims have spent tens of thousands of dollars.

      Only the stupid ones. Patent trolls shotgun out thousands and thousands of threatening letters, hoping someone will bite. That is why it is called "trolling". The biggest mistake you can make is to respond to their letter. That marks you as a target. They can't possibly afford to file so many lawsuits, so they only go after the fools. You should never respond to a patent troll until you have been served an actual filing by a legitimate process server.

      IANAL, and if I were, I would give you the exact opposite advice: A letter from a patent troll requires a robust and muscular response, and I need a $10k retainer to do that.

    9. Re:Judge Davis retired last year by kelemvor4 · · Score: 1

      By which point the victims have spent tens of thousands of dollars.

      Only the stupid ones. Patent trolls shotgun out thousands and thousands of threatening letters, hoping someone will bite. That is why it is called "trolling". The biggest mistake you can make is to respond to their letter. That marks you as a target. They can't possibly afford to file so many lawsuits, so they only go after the fools. You should never respond to a patent troll until you have been served an actual filing by a legitimate process server.

      IANAL, and if I were, I would give you the exact opposite advice: A letter from a patent troll requires a robust and muscular response, and I need a $10k retainer to do that.

      If you were a lawyer you'd be a cheap date, apparently.

    10. Re:Judge Davis retired last year by andydread · · Score: 1

      because no one is petitioning the government to investigate them like they did with the family of the boy that visited the gorilla in his habitat.

    11. Re:Judge Davis retired last year by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Bad advice for victims in Indiana: ignoring the letter admits guilt, there, apparently.

    12. Re:Judge Davis retired last year by Khyber · · Score: 1

      " The statute of limitations has probably run out for most of those cases."

      I was under the impression that the statue of limitations begins when the party has reasonable cause to believe they have been harmed by an action. As soon as they learn of these relationships and how deep they go, they have reasonable cause. They had no reasonable cause to suspect they had been wronged before hand, in the eyes of the law.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    13. Re:Judge Davis retired last year by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      "The biggest mistake you can make is to respond to their letter."

      Now wait a minute. Didn't we establish in yesterday's legal troll thread that if you fail to respond to one of these letters the troll wins, and can execute on you for whatever amount he claims?

    14. Re:Judge Davis retired last year by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No. That one was served, and failed to show up in court and lost by default. Very different than receiving one of the troll threat letters.

    15. Re:Judge Davis retired last year by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      "That one was served, and failed to show up in court and lost by default."

      I was subpoenaed once, and was served the conventional way, by a clerk coming to my address and handing me the document, but there was commentary in the previous thread to the effect that you can now be served by mail. So how does a defendant determine that an official-looking patent troll broadcast letter coming from out of state is not a legal service in the state of origin?

    16. Re:Judge Davis retired last year by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      By which point the victims have spent tens of thousands of dollars. This is a very serious problem, and one that has significant costs for the economy. If there is also corruption involved, then why isn't the judge and his son now being interviewed by state of Federal law enforcement? There's no way any of this ethical, and almost certainly it has to be illegal.

      LAWYERS are a significant burden on the North American economy! Loads of things cost more because of over-litigation and having to pay for litigation insurance. The mess of complex laws, regulations and bylaws make doing anything a minefield. Its a wonder anyone can do business in North America at all. Anyone except lawyers and insurers that is!

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    17. Re:Judge Davis retired last year by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      By which point the victims have spent tens of thousands of dollars.

      Only the stupid ones. Patent trolls shotgun out thousands and thousands of threatening letters, hoping someone will bite. That is why it is called "trolling". The biggest mistake you can make is to respond to their letter. That marks you as a target. They can't possibly afford to file so many lawsuits, so they only go after the fools. You should never respond to a patent troll until you have been served an actual filing by a legitimate process server.

      IANAL, and if I were, I would give you the exact opposite advice: A letter from a patent troll requires a robust and muscular response, and I need a $10k retainer to do that.

      Hah and in some jurisdictions failing to respond is an admission of guilt!

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    18. Re: Judge Davis retired last year by dsgrntlxmply · · Score: 2

      Opinion: the population within that district, especially towns like Tyler, tend to be low income, not highly educated, and adhere to religious sects that emphasize personal propensity to sin, unquestioning acceptance of authority, and willingness to punish very harshly an act that has been framed as a moral wrong.

      The people want to be and often are personally decent, but scientific rigor and skepticism take a distant second to authority and persuasion. Those are the jurors.

      My ancestry is there, and I know the mindset.

    19. Re:Judge Davis retired last year by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      My recollection is that the statute of limitations generally begins either when an event occurs or when it is discovered, but that the latter is generally reserved for situations where the malfeasance is not obvious until discovered. The judge and prosecutor have the same last name, so that doesn't really apply here.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    20. Re:Judge Davis retired last year by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Often the trolls just settle out of court. They make enough money this way that they can afford to lose a few cases on appeal. If you settle out of court then you'll never be able to claw that money back if new evidence turns up.

    21. Re:Judge Davis retired last year by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Informative

      there was commentary in the previous thread to the effect that you can now be served by mail.

      Your initial summons cannot be served by mail, unless you agree to be served by mail and voluntarily acknowledge receiving it. The initial filing must be hand delivered, and looks very different from just a letter. If you are a corporation, you cannot avoid service by hiding in the restroom. You must accept service at your registered place of business during regular business hours.

    22. Re:Judge Davis retired last year by houghi · · Score: 1

      And in other cases if you do not reply or contest, they go along with assuming you are guilty.
      Damned if you do. Damned if you don't.

      And no, I am not a lawyer, so I will not understand the difference between these two when they send them to me.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    23. Re:Judge Davis retired last year by doccus · · Score: 1

      And in other cases if you do not reply or contest, they go along with assuming you are guilty.
      Damned if you do. Damned if you don't.

      And no, I am not a lawyer, so I will not understand the difference between these two when they send them to me.

      Failing to respond to a threat letter admits nothing. It is when they show up at your door with an actual summons that you should react. Forcefully.
      'In my opinion', of course, as IANAL either . Even so, I, unfortunately learned this lesson the hard way ;-( .... Personally, I think that statute of limitations notwithstanding, if it can be shown that all these cases were settled by a prosecuting attorney and judge family team with something to gain from their actions, then the law should be redrafted to retroactively prosecute corruption in the legal arena. Of course,it'll never happen

  2. Move along, nothing to see by cdrudge · · Score: 4, Informative

    The developer got sued in the Eastern District of Texas, where almost all patent cases are filed. A lawyer that handles some patent cases has a father that is/was a judge in the same district, neither fact would be particularly startling to learn. Dad is stepping down from the bench to go into private practice for patents. No allegations that any case filed by the son was heard by the dad.

    Unless there's more here than is being said, there's no story here aside from a stupid patent troll filing a stupid troll case.

    1. Re:Move along, nothing to see by cdrudge · · Score: 4, Informative

      After watching video, the developer doesn't seem to understand how patents, lawsuits, or the whole process works.

      He thinks he's committed a crime. He hasn't. At worst, he's committed patent infringement, a civil matter.

      He thinks that if a company wasn't involved in the implementation of his game or the Google Play store that they don't have a right to claim a patent violation.

      He thinks that it's suspicious that a judge in the most patent friendly district doesn't toss out patent cases. Shocker.

      He thinks the father-son team are in cahoots because there's a financial incentive for dad to hear the cases and the son to file them. Never mind that the same logic would apply to any type of law. (e.g. A prosecuting son would file criminal charges, and a father judge would hear criminal cases but not necessarily the son's). Or that the son would take up the family business specializing in an field that the locality is known for.

    2. Re:Move along, nothing to see by rahvin112 · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's a clear judicial ethics violation for a judge to hear a case in which one of his relatives (out to the 3rd degree) is a participant in the case in ANY fashion no matter how minuscule. An direct investment of a $100 by a cousin in a company disqualifies a judge from hearing a suit with that company. This is appealable if the Judge refuses to recuse themselves.

    3. Re:Move along, nothing to see by Hodr · · Score: 1

      Pretty sure that's not what was happening or what was alleged. The son specializes in a very specific and incredibly lucrative type of litigation. The father appears to be very friendly towards those that like to pursue such litigation, encouraging them to file in his district. The son ends up with much more work than would otherwise be the case if he lived ANYWHERE else in the US (including Silicon Valley, where there is the largest concentration of US technology firms).

  3. Suing Minecraft? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Given MS owns it and has a one or two lawyers, patents, and a little available cash to defend itself that seems to be an odd target to pick. Given MS also has an app store I would think they will fight this to protect their interests; a win would be good for everyone. MS and good, two things you never thought you'd hear together on /.

    --
    I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    1. Re:Suing Minecraft? by Jason+Levine · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not just Microsoft, but I would think Google would get involved with this. I can understand why the patent troll would go after the app developers instead of Google (take on the small fish and hope they're intimidated enough to give you money instead of challenging the giant shark to a biting contest). That said, Google should want to protect their developers from lawsuits like this. At the very least, they should want to make sure that no legal precedent was set saying that this patent troll "patented app stores."

      Let's get Apple in on this too. They have an app store also. Unite Apple, Google, and Microsoft to take the patent troll down. I'd pay to see that happen!

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    2. Re:Suing Minecraft? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      Not just Microsoft, but I would think Google would get involved with this. I can understand why the patent troll would go after the app developers instead of Google (take on the small fish and hope they're intimidated enough to give you money instead of challenging the giant shark to a biting contest). That said, Google should want to protect their developers from lawsuits like this. At the very least, they should want to make sure that no legal precedent was set saying that this patent troll "patented app stores."

      Let's get Apple in on this too. They have an app store also. Unite Apple, Google, and Microsoft to take the patent troll down. I'd pay to see that happen!

      While I agree with you when they took on Minecraft they did't go after a small fish, they went after Microsoft. To use a /. car analogy, that's like deciding to challenge an F1 driver to a race to prove how good you are.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    3. Re:Suing Minecraft? by jimtheowl · · Score: 1

      And depending on how it plays out, you might wonder if the race wasn't a setup and the F1 driver was in on it.

    4. Re:Suing Minecraft? by cdrudge · · Score: 1

      They didn't go after Microsoft. They went after Mojang in July of 2012. Microsoft subsequently acquired Mojang as well as the liability from the lawsuit. The case still sits open with little activity.

    5. Re:Suing Minecraft? by pr0fessor · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We have seen this before with the printer scam, they were suing small companies that owned certain printers for infringing patents dealing with printers but not the manufacture. Now they have a patent that describes a service and again they are going after the business consumer and not the provider, it is a scam and should be treated as such.

    6. Re:Suing Minecraft? by redshirt · · Score: 3, Informative

      Microsoft has previous history with Uniloc over Windows XP activation - and settled for an undisclosed amount after a $300 million judgement was thrown out. So, don't count on Microsoft being heroic in this action.

    7. Re:Suing Minecraft? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      except Microsoft would LOVE to get Google's and Apple's app stores taken down so wouldn't they "settle" with this joker and help fund him as he goes after the others? It is not like Microsoft has not done this kind of thing before. cough - SCO - cough.

    8. Re:Suing Minecraft? by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Given MS owns it and has a one or two lawyers, patents, and a little available cash to defend itself that seems to be an odd target to pick. Given MS also has an app store I would think they will fight this to protect their interests; a win would be good for everyone. MS and good, two things you never thought you'd hear together on /.

      My best friend is a lawyer and we've known each other since college, so I know way more about how the US legal system really works than most posters here. Anything and I do mean anything can happen in a court case, whether heard by a jury or a judge. You can ask RIM about that. They got a settlement offer over a patent suit from a troll and they thought the case was frivolous so the went to court and had to pay over a billion dollars in damages after losing. The settlement wanted half or less of that. So the troll here may be quite willing to gamble that Microsoft could lose and have to pay them a fortune or they'll just settle it to avoid the hassle and either way the troll wins big time. Worst case for them is some lost money for lawyers fees but if they have their own lawyer on staff, that's a sunk cost anyway. One of the downsides of having a friend who is a lawyer is that you come to understand that all lawyers believe the current US legal system is working perfectly as is and they don't see any problem with people like Austin Meyer having to spend a fortune just to defend themselves. They don't see it as wasted money just to get back to square one because even is Austin "wins" in court, he'll be out big time lawyer fees to do so and he won't actually make any money himself from "winning". Lawyers have zero problems with this. To them, even if Austin is financially destroyed by legal fees and he wins, then it was all worthwhile.

    9. Re:Suing Minecraft? by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      It's not really a scam - patents forbid even the mere use of a patented invention without a license. I agree that it's a crappy way to do business, but it's completely legal.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    10. Re:Suing Minecraft? by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

      Well if you search it a little you will find that Uniloc is a security and copy protection software company and that the patent they are claiming is a for a copy protection system to valid application license which they may totally have a real claim depending on whether the patent is valid but it should still be against google because it a google service the companies they are suing are using for license validation.

  4. Why doesn't Google help defend the victims? by ChesterRafoon · · Score: 2

    Google has more money and lawyers than just about anyone and it is their app store that is at the center of the whole dispute. Why don't they grow a pair and help defend the app developers who use their store and have been sued? Nice business partner their Google ...

    1. Re:Why doesn't Google help defend the victims? by DamonHD · · Score: 2

      The little matter of whether they have legal standing to get involved...

      Rgds

      Damon

      --
      http://m.earth.org.uk/
    2. Re:Why doesn't Google help defend the victims? by ukoda · · Score: 2

      Surely there is no legal reason why Google can not provide support for a developer being attacked for using Google services, and every commercial reason to support the developer. If I was running Google I would be putting some of my best lawyers at the developers disposal at no cost to the developer. If the troll wins against this developer then I assume they would then go after every successful app at Play Store which would have a follow on effect on Play Store in general.

  5. Prior Art by AaronW · · Score: 3, Informative

    When GRiD Systems released their first laptop, the Compass 1101, in 1981 it had a built-in 1200 baud modem. It ran GRiD OS, a multi-tasking operating system. They also had the concept of an app store, where a user could purchase apps and the laptop would connect to a central server and download the apps. I'm sure their patents have expired.

    Note: I worked at GRiD while in college.

    Here is a good talk about the GRiD Compass by Jeff Hawkins, who later founded Palm: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    --
    This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
    1. Re:Prior Art by AaronW · · Score: 1

      Sorry to correct myself, but it was introduced in 1982, not 1981.

      --
      This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
    2. Re:Prior Art by PPH · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, but back in those days, one would dial directly into a BBS or server to download their apps. Those patents may have expired. But all one needs to do is to append the phrase "using the Internet" and refile.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    3. Re:Prior Art by jcr · · Score: 1

      Around the same time, there was a company in the DC area called "Software Express VideoTex", which was basically a dial-up app store.

      It's not just prior art, it's ridiculously obvious that software can be sold over a network connection. The patent should never have been issued.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    4. Re:Prior Art by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      "In those days a laptop was the size of a suitcase."

      I had one of these, the Compaq Portable. It weighed 35 pounds, had a 5-inch green-screen display and dual floppies, and ran MSDOS. Because it had a suitcase handle in the back it was as theoretically "portable" as a Weber grill with a handle on it would be. No batteries, because you had to plug it in. Stand back, because it generated roughly the same amount of heat as that Weber grill.

      And yes, the software actually ran off one floppy disk, with the 176K acreage of the other being available for storage. Uphill! Both ways!

    5. Re:Prior Art by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      "In those days a laptop was the size of a suitcase."

      I had one of these, the Compaq Portable. It weighed 35 pounds, had a 5-inch green-screen display and dual floppies, and ran MSDOS. Because it had a suitcase handle in the back it was as theoretically "portable" as a Weber grill with a handle on it would be. No batteries, because you had to plug it in. Stand back, because it generated roughly the same amount of heat as that Weber grill.

      And yes, the software actually ran off one floppy disk, with the 176K acreage of the other being available for storage. Uphill! Both ways!

      I don't think anyone called them 'laptops', they were fondly known as 'tote-ables'. I used to have a Sparcstation Voyager

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
  6. Why do judges allow these lawsuits? by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 2

    I don't understand why these go ahead because in this case the developer is a user of the application store. The lawsuit should be against Google if the patent is for an app market. It would be as if I had a patent on a car engine part and then started filing lawsuits against people who bought cars instead of the car engine manufacturers.

    1. Re:Why do judges allow these lawsuits? by msauve · · Score: 1
      "It would be as if I had a patent on a car engine part and then started filing lawsuits against people who bought cars instead of the car engine manufacturers."

      Welcome to US law, which allows exactly that.

      ...whoever without authority makes, uses, offers to sell, or sells any patented invention... infringes the patent.

      - 35 USC 271 (emphasis added).

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    2. Re:Why do judges allow these lawsuits? by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      It's a bit like 3rd party debt collectors - they go for the 'easy money'. The point isn't to be correct, the point is to go after those who can be intimidated to give them a few thousand dollars.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    3. Re:Why do judges allow these lawsuits? by internerdj · · Score: 1

      So theoretically they could sue everyone with an android phone?

    4. Re:Why do judges allow these lawsuits? by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      Yup. Not worth the effort, of course, but they could if they really wanted to.

    5. Re:Why do judges allow these lawsuits? by tommeke100 · · Score: 1

      It's very perverse. In this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8XknFl1l_8), you see the guy actually seeking out those patent troll offices. They appear to be just empty offices with no one inside. So a small hallway in an office space will host door after door each being the address for one patent troll company. The craziest part is that one of these buildings is just across the street from the courthouse! So, those judges know damn well these patent trolls are just empty boxes created to simply go after people to settle.

    6. Re:Why do judges allow these lawsuits? by arth1 · · Score: 1

      So theoretically they could sue everyone with an android phone?

      No, only those who purchase instant download software.

      Phones with Google Play disabled aren't that uncommon, perhaps especially for phones given to children.

  7. Let me double down on what I said yesterday by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    Yet another example that illustrates why I think we would be better off if access to the civil court system were made significantly more difficult for plaintiffs than defendants. There are various ways in which we might do this. Yesterday's thread attracted a lot of posts in favor of loser pays, which privileges the wealthier litigant unless judges have discretion in charging costs to the losing party.

    My own suggestion was to tighten up the evidence rules and jury voting in civil procedure to match the tougher standards of criminal procedure, a change which would inhibit junk suits (the kind at issue yesterday) without limiting anyone's access to the courts for cases which they themselves perceive as being able to jump the higher evidence bar. This elicited predictions that civilization would collapse if even that modest reform were made to the civil lawyer gravy train.

    I also think that judges should have discretion to lock out civil plaintiffs who have a filing history that fits the old common-law definition of 'barratry'. The responses were equally negative. But no, I still don't want to go on living under a legal system that feels threatened by common sense. Let's vote for the candidate most likely to blow it to hell.

    1. Re:Let me double down on what I said yesterday by cdrudge · · Score: 2

      Yesterday's thread attracted a lot of posts in favor of loser pays, which privileges the wealthier litigant unless judges have discretion in charging costs to the losing party.

      Loser can be required to pay in the case of contract disputes where both parties previously agreed that prevailing party can recover costs.

      Judges already have discretion in awarding fees, sanctions, or worse for frivilous, vexatious, similarly improper lawsuits. Look up Prenda Law (and related names) in the mess that they've gotten themselves into over the years in multiple different states for filing copyright troll lawsuits.

      I also think that judges should have discretion to lock out civil plaintiffs who have a filing history that fits the old common-law definition of 'barratry'.

      They already have that too. They refer lawyers to bar association review boards for disbarment. And there's also civil and criminal contempt charges if it comes down to it as well.

    2. Re:Let me double down on what I said yesterday by barc0001 · · Score: 1

      We have a "loser pay" legal system here in Canada. What that means is in civil cases, the losing party pays both parties' legal fees. As a result, we generally don't have moronic lawsuits filed because if someone sues you over something that you'll be able to defend easily, you just go get an attorney who notes the merits on the consult and then takes his/her costs from the idiot once they lose.

      On the other hand the disadvantage of this system is if you have a case that could go either way or looks close, that's a disincentive to go forward with a suit that might otherwise have merit.

      But on the plus side we don't have people suing for $30,000 over a $40 printer,

      https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/16/06/06/1748256/man-sued-for-30k-over-40-printer-he-sold-on-craigslist

      or someone suing for $54 million over a pair of pants:

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/25/AR2007062500443.html

      Because if they tried that up here the defendant would just hire a very expensive lawyer and the plaintiff would be stuck with the bill after their inevitable loss.

  8. Re:NOOO You don't say! by fluffernutter · · Score: 2

    We should automate them immediately. People say AI is getting pretty good. That's enough.

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  9. The Patent In Question by Jason+Levine · · Score: 4, Informative

    It took some minor Googling, but I found the patent that Uniloc is claiming Austin Meyer violated.

    According to this post by Meyer, they first claimed he violated one claim on the patent:

    107. Computer code executable on an electronic device to prevent unauthorized access to electronic data stored on the electronic device, the computer code comprising: code for storing license data on a portable licensing medium configured to communicate with the electronic device; code for determining whether to allow access to the electronic data based on the license data; code for verifying the license data stored on the licensing medium by communicating with a registration authority having verification data; and code for providing updated license data received from the registration authority to the licensing medium.

    Now, is it just me or could that describe any authorization system? For example, you install some software product, get a license key from the company, and use it to prove to the software that you actually bought it and should be allowed to run it.

    So Meyer fought for three years and finally got this claim overturned. The patent office admitted this claim shouldn't have been approved. Victory, right? Nope. Uniloc is now claiming that he's violating:

    21. A system according to claim 1, wherein the licensing medium comprises a memory installed in a cellular telephone.
    22. A system according to claim 21, wherein the licensing medium is not removable from the cellular telephone.

    This patent has 113 claims. Even if he took them out five at a time, at the current rate it would take him 68 YEARS for the patent to be tossed out entirely. Meanwhile, he'll rack up tons of legal fees (not to mention time/stress/life disruption) and Uniloc will just keep playing patent whack-a-mole.

    BTW, that "claim 1" that #21 references?

    1. A system for preventing unauthorized access to electronic data on an electronic device, the system comprising: a portable licensing medium configured to communicate with the electronic device and to store license data, the license data configured to be used by the electronic device to determine whether to allow access to the electronic data; and a registration authority configured to communicate with the electronic device, the registration authority having verification data for verifying the license data stored on the licensing medium, wherein the registration authority provides updated license data for the licensing medium.

    This looks suspiciously like #107. It's like they built in redundancy in their patent trolling. "Take out a couple of our claims. No problem. We've got five more like them in the same patent and ten other patents just like this one waiting in the wings."

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    1. Re:The Patent In Question by Dragonslicer · · Score: 2

      Fortunately, if Claim 107 was already ruled invalid, summary judgment for invalidity of Claim 1 should be pretty easy to get. Claim 21 should be easy to kill by obviousness. Claim 22 might be indefinite anyway, since it's hard to define the licensing medium as being both "portable" and "not removable". It would probably also be considered obvious, since the only two possibilities are "removable" and "not removable", and I can't imagine that they'd be able to show that making it not removable was difficult enough to be worth a patent.

    2. Re:The Patent In Question by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      Name a company that supports DRM and doesn't have the resources to spend on expensive lawyers

    3. Re:The Patent In Question by portwojc · · Score: 1

      I thought only the parent claims mattered? The child doesn't count when it comes to it.

    4. Re:The Patent In Question by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      The problem is that it took 3 years to get Claim 107 declared invalid. Even if they could get the other claims dismissed in 6 months, Uniloc could come back and decide that some of the other 110 claims are being violated now. If you were even able to knock them out at a rate of one per month (extremely quickly given how long the first one took), it would take over 9 years to get them all dismissed. At that point, they'd likely trot out another overly vague patent with a hundred claims.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    5. Re:The Patent In Question by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      If Uniloc came back a third time, they'd have solid grounds for filing for declaratory judgment to get most/all of the claims invalidated at once. Or if the judge gets really annoyed, he/she could deny Uniloc's request to add claims to the case.

    6. Re:The Patent In Question by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      Except this was filed in patent-troll friendly East Texas. The judge would probably allow it and demand that Meyer keep whacking moles until he missed one.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    7. Re:The Patent In Question by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      That's the nice thing about filing for declaratory judgment, though - you get to pick the jurisdiction instead of the patent holder. Of course, the patent holder will certainly ask to have it moved to Eastern Texas, but it's not guaranteed that the judge will grant it.

  10. Lawsuit filed in 2012, last update early 2015 by raymorris · · Score: 2

    > According to Wikipedia, Judge Davis retired from the eastern district of Texas a year ago. Why is he still hearing cases?

    The suit was originally filed in 2012. The last motion I found was early 2015. So most of this case occurred prior to Judge Davis leaving the bench.

    1. Re:Lawsuit filed in 2012, last update early 2015 by mamono · · Score: 5, Informative

      I work for one of the District Courts. We have several judges who are "retired" but still working. Sometimes the just go in to senior status, sometimes they are recalled. It depends on the caseload of the court in question.

  11. Criminal Charges? by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

    But now that he's retired, there's nothing that can be done

    If the allegations are true then surely his actions are against the law, corruption or perverting the course of justice come to mind but IANAL. So surely charing him with a suitable offence followed by prison time if convicted would be something that could be done regardless of whether or not he is retired.

  12. I forwarded that information to Meyer by raymorris · · Score: 1

    That's interesting. I sent Meyer a note quoting what you said.

  13. Conflict by krray · · Score: 1

    Conflict of interests. Illegal too. Leonard Davis will be removed from the bench AND disbarred. Not if, but when.

    Fortunately ... not my battle. It'll be a battle to get there though.

    1. Re:Conflict by cdrudge · · Score: 1

      Or not. Since he's already left the bench, had no conflict of interest, and committed no crimes that have been accused.

    2. Re:Conflict by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Leaving the bench != sitting in as commissioner or magistrate. Plenty of 'retired' judges are still sitting on a bench to this day.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  14. Re:Really? by stealth_finger · · Score: 3, Funny

    I have a patent on first posts. You'll be hearing from my lawyer. See you in Texas!

    --
    Wanna buy a shirt?
    https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
  15. Retired judges seem to get re-hired by swb · · Score: 2

    Retired judges seem to get hired all the time as "special masters" or other one-time positions they don't want to use regular sitting judges for. It almost seems to be like military officers, they may step down from the bench but they seem to retain their judge credentials somehow, just like officers may retire from the military but can be recalled if they haven't also resigned their commissions.

  16. Easy solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This wouldn't happen at all if we could just admit that patents don't provide any benefits to society at all, and just banned them entirely.

  17. Re:Only time I'll ever root for patent trolls by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

    It's pretty trivial to side-load apps on an Android device, you just go to the security settings and select "Allow installation of apps from unknown sources"
    Running an APK file then installs the app.

  18. Wait by Trogre · · Score: 1

    There's a jurisdiction that recognizes software patents?

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  19. Re:TRUMP! by arth1 · · Score: 1

    Fuck this patent mess which Congress REFUSES TO FIX. Lesser of two evils: Clinton (more of the same) or Trump (disruptive change). There's a lot I don't like about the Don, but if he promises to ambush patent trolling with a sledgehammer to forever put a stop this asshattery, the tech community would get behind him.

    No, over on the sane side, we generally realize that binary thinking is for computers and idiots, and that the enemy of my enemy isn't automatically my friend.

    Remember, Trump is the guy who wanted Bill Gates to help shut down the internet so ISIS couldn't use it...

  20. sic Google sic by samantha · · Score: 1

    Google needs to stomp these idiots flat. It should be trivially easy to do so with their war chest. In any event no sane judge would even hear a case of "infringement" that didn't involve a plaintiff who was in any way the infringer.

    1. Re:sic Google sic by stoatwblr · · Score: 1

      "Google needs to stomp these idiots flat. It should be trivially easy to do so with their war chest"

      The problem is that the system allows the trolls to pick and choose who they go after. It's not like trademark law where every perceived infringement has to be chased.

      For Google to become involved they have to be recognised as having standing in the case - and in all liklihood the troll would fight very hard to prevent that happening.

      It's possible they could buy into the dev's legal fees but that opens other problems for Google that I'm pretty sure they'd prefer to avoid. Do they indemnify anyone publishing via Google Play against patent claims on the method?

  21. Re:Really? by michelcolman · · Score: 1

    Great, I've got a patent on replies to first posts so I'll see you there.

  22. Re:Really? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

    I hold the patent on sarcastic lawsuit posts, I'll be seeing you both there.

    --
    APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  23. Don't Feed Stray Dogs by zphreaker · · Score: 1

    My wife recently fed a stray dog.. now the dog won't leave. Words of advice hidden in plain site. If a patent troll sends you a letter, ignore it. On the contrary, if everyone were to boycott Google Play and iOS app-store, these big boys would likely do what's right and put their money towards protecting developers. Bottom line, this patent trolling needs to end and it is the duty of the providers to put their billions towards action to eliminate said trolls.