Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Nikola (Motors) is Suing Tesla (engadget.com)

Posted by msmash on from the patent-troll dept.

An anonymous reader shares a report: Nikola Tesla invented alternating electrical current. Nikola Motors is a mobility company working on a hydrogen-powered semi truck. Tesla makes fully electric vehicles and last December unveiled its EV Semi. Nikola Motors is suing Tesla Motors over patent infringements, according to Electrek. Nikola alleges that Tesla infringes on three of its patents: fuselage design, a wraparound windshield on a semi truck and a mid-entry door. Nikola claims that these design similarities have "caused confusion" among customers and stolen away over $2 billion in business, and that if problems arise with Tesla's Semi (like battery fires or glitches with autonomous driving), they'll be attributed to Nikola. Typical patent troll stuff.

3 of 187 comments (clear)

  1. Patent Trolls by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm not sure what the laws on the books are for frivolous patent troll lawsuits, but it would be really beneficial to society if frivolous patent law suits were heavily discouraged by huge fines to the troll perpetrating them.

    There is obviously a valid and just use for patents; but there is so much abuse of the system it is ludicrous.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    1. Re:Patent Trolls by SlaveToTheGrind · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The term "patent troll" typically describes a patentholder who is not actually practicing the patent but simply trying to monetize it.

      Nikola has been actively developing its electric and hydrogen powered semi trucks for several years now and is targeting its first commercial sales next year. The complaint alleges that Tesla first tried to poach Nikola's chief design engineer, and then simply copied Nikola's patented design.

      That doesn't strike me as being even close to a typical "patent troll" scenario.

    2. Re:Patent Trolls by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My usual suggestion is the loser pays is capped at the *lesser* amount that the parties paid for defense/offense.

      I'd go a step further and would like to see the amount of money that either side can spend be capped as well. Or at least capped, to a reasonable amount, in relation to what the non corporation can spend. Depending on the patent it may very well be worth it for a large corporation to throw millions of dollars at a individual knowing that they will only recoup, say $20K, in legal fees when they will make hundreds of millions off of a patent. If a corporation needs to spend $50K for each dollar an individual spends to defend a patent, then they don't have much of a case.