Slashdot Mirror
Apple Accuses Qualcomm of Patent Infringement in Countersuit (reuters.com)
From a report: Apple on Wednesday filed a countersuit against Qualcomm, alleging that Qualcomm's Snapdragon mobile phone chips that power a wide variety of Android-based devices infringe on Apple's patents, the latest development in a long-running dispute. Qualcomm in July accused Apple of infringing several patents related to helping mobile phones get better battery life. Apple has denied the claims that it violated Qualcomm's battery life patents and alleged that Qualcomm's patents were invalid, a common move in such cases. But on Wednesday, in a filing in U.S. District Court in San Diego, Apple revised its answer to Qualcomm's complaint with accusations of its own. Apple alleges it owns at least eight battery life patents that Qualcomm has violated.
This action by Apple shows why a company wants patents even if it does not run around enforcing them all the time. It is a war chest for when someone else sues you. Sue IBM for patent infringement? IBM has tens of thousands of patents to sort through to counterattack.
Blowback can be a bitch.
Here's how we fix this bullshit, perhaps for good.
Step #1: Audit every patent holder with more than 5,000 patents in their "war chest". Force all patent holders to prove they are actively using their patents.
Step #2: Any patents merely being held for the purposes of patent warmongering, preventing competition, or stifling innovation will be forced into expiration, and put up for bid.
Step #3: Sit back and watch as (former) patent holders are forced to spend their (offshore) cash reserves and executive bonus cash pools in order to buy back their pointless "war chests" of patented dominance.
Step #4: Lather, rinse, and repeat every 3 years.
Might not be 100% effective in restoring balance to the patent system, but it sure as hell would be fun to watch patent hoarders squirm, which may ultimately prove that hoarding is no longer a profitable venture.
Step #1 falls down immediately. The constitution clearly states that "To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries." There is no requirement that they exercise that right.
Step #2 falls down because of the 5th amendment; property can only be seized when it remains property of the US government. For Intellectual property, the well-trodden path is that the government simply infringes on the patent, and decides what it considers a "just" compensation to the patent holder -- the patent doesn't change hands.
A change of this magnitude literally requires a constitutional amendment, which are pretty hard to pass in the best of circumstances.
-- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.