Cloudflare Defeats Patent Troll (cloudflare.com)
- Reference: 0175189345
- News link: https://yro.slashdot.org/story/24/10/04/0723228/cloudflare-defeats-patent-troll
- Source link: https://blog.cloudflare.com/patent-troll-sable-pays-up/
Sable, described by Cloudflare as a "patent troll," had previously sued several tech companies, including Cisco and Juniper Networks, who settled out of court. Cloudflare's aggressive defense strategy included launching Project Jengo, a crowd-sourced initiative to invalidate Sable's patents. The settlement prevents Sable from asserting these patents against any other company in the future, marking a significant blow to patent trolling practices in the tech industry. In a blog post, Cloudflare adds:
> While this $225,000 can't fully compensate us for the time, energy and frustration of having to deal with this litigation for nearly three years, it does help to even the score a bit. And we hope that it sends an important message to patent trolls everywhere to beware before taking on Cloudflare.
[1] https://blog.cloudflare.com/patent-troll-sable-pays-up/
[2] https://yro.slashdot.org/story/24/02/13/1654247/cloudflare-defeats-another-patent-troll-with-crowd-sourced-prior-art-army
Next step: sue the PTO examiners (Score:1)
Since Cloudflare proved the patents weren't valid, the next step should be to sue the PTO and examiners for wasting the public's taxes on their fraud (to which the scam called 'qualified immunity' shouldn't apply since they didn't do their job properly in the first place).
Re:Next step: sue the PTO examiners (Score:5, Insightful)
The examiners are protected by sovereign immunity. Anyway, it is hardly their fault. The government has been failing to adequately fund the patent office for a long time. The typical examiner does not have the time or resources to properly examine a patent. What we need is a system, like that in several other countries, which allows interested parties to challenge a patent before it is approved.
Wrong incentive for the PTO? (Score:2)
My understanding is that the patent office's funding is based on the number of patents that it approves . There is no funding for rejecting a patent. This really needs to be fixed: provide funding for processing patent applications, whatever the final outcome. In fact, it might be good for rejected patents to be slightly more lucrative than approved patents, just to give an incentive to be careful.
Re:Wrong incentive for the PTO? (Score:4, Informative)
Reply to myself - apparently I am somewhat wrong. Funding is provided by fees. Successful patents do generate more fees (maintenance fees must be paid). However, the application fee remains the same whether a patent is granted or not.
Re: (Score:2)
Then the examiners' salaries should be tied how airtight the patents they approve are - anything that gets thrown out results in them being on the hook for the costs of reversing it (including fees paid by Cloudflare in this case, and costs to the taxpayers from all resulting court costs).
Re: (Score:2)
there is the application fee which is non-refundable, whether or not it's approved
Re: (Score:2)
> The examiners are protected by sovereign immunity.
Thanks for the correction (vs. 'qualified immunity').
Still complete bullshit/scam they can end up wasting taxpayers' money (their salary, then the court cases) for issuing bogus patents by being shit at their job in a fashion that would get anyone else fired for that same level of incompetence, all without any repercussions to them.
Re: (Score:2)
[1]Presumption of Regularity [supremecourt.gov] prevents a suit against the patent examiner(s).
[1] https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/17/17-965/40218/20180327150034930_Travel%20Ban%2017-965%20FINAL.pdf
Re: (Score:1)
How convenient for the scammers known as the PTO examiners (see my [1]other comment [slashdot.org]).
Nice lucrative and cushy job they get, just like corrupt appointed judges.
[1] https://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=23475825&cid=64839297
Cloudflare wears a cape (Score:2)
Good on Cloudflare for not just secretly paying up. Patent trolls need to suffer - far more than this, but this is a decent start.
Watch out, though: the US is considering softening the stance against software patents. Encouraged, undoubtedly, by political donations by such companies. We need to reduce patent protection, not increase it.
Re: (Score:2)
Is 4000 employees a "massive" company? I am glad that a medium size company took this on and was able to win.
If you own stock in Cisco or Juniper (Score:5, Interesting)
Or any other company that settled, you should take this up with the board of directors, who agreed to settle a case they clearly should have fought.
They're as much to blame for the existence of patent trolls, and the damage they do, as the patent trolls themselves. If every victim (who has the money, at least, and Cisco and Juniper certainly do) fought tooth and nail, there'd be no profit even if the trolls won. And money is the only thing this is about.
Re: (Score:2)
If I had an upvote, it would be yours.
Terminate them now (Score:2)
Those lowlifes should be kicked repeatedly in the mouth while they are down.
Incorporate Sable 2.0 (Score:2)
Can't they just create a new corporation, sell the portfolio to them, then continue trolling?
Re: (Score:2)
No. RTFS:
> forcing the patent holder to dedicate its entire portfolio to the public domain
How's their case with the porn company going? (Score:2)
Apparently Phat Cat Global (the company that apparently controls uncensored Japanese porn distribution label Caribbeancom at the moment) [1]sued CloudFlare in June [justia.com] for copyright infringement. I don't have any more details on the case. Does anyone else know what's going on?
[1] https://dockets.justia.com/docket/california/candce/3:2024cv03404/430673
No winners (Score:2)
Seriously is it possible for both sides to lose? Because that should have happened between these two.
Re: (Score:2)
They kind of both did as it cost Cloudflare money, but in cases against patent trolls we always want the patent trolls to lose
Well done, Cloudflare! (Score:4, Informative)
If only this kind of thing were more commonplace. We need collective solidarity against arseholes.
and they still had to pay more then $225,000 for l (Score:2)
and they still had to pay more then $225,000 for legal bills
Re: (Score:3)
Patent trolling & rent-seeking have become commonplace business models in the USA & elsewhere. These are issues that fundamentally affect everyone, stifle cultural & economic development, & increase the cost of living for everyone while rewarding an exploitative few. Rule of law is supposed to be about what is fair & just & for the good of all, not a minority of opportunists.
Dichotomy: Do you wanna live in a fair & just society or do you wanna be exploited?
Re:and they still had to pay more then $225,000 fo (Score:4, Insightful)
I want to live in a fair and just society. The problem is my idea of fair and just and yours may not and probably aren't the same.
The problem is, we want to protect the "minority" with the rule of law (tyranny of the majority) , but that same rule of law can be abused by the very people it is supposed to protect (tyranny of the minority).
The only person that can prevent you (me/us) from being exploited is you (me/us). The government isn't going to do this. There are whole YouTube channels dedicated to the abuses of government that do not know the laws that constrain it.
Re: (Score:2)
cloudflare spent 3 or 4 times that
Re: (Score:2)
That is probably correct. However the true cost savings is passed on to the rest of us.
While it seems like it is cheaper to settle, it really isn't. It is cheaper, almost always, to fight the trolls, but most of those savings are found elsewhere. See IBM vs SCO for a fine example of fighting to win costing a lot, but being cheaper in the end.
Re: (Score:3)
> While it seems like it is cheaper to settle, it really isn't.
As Kipling said,
That if once you have paid him the Dane-geld
You never get rid of the Dane.
Re:and they still had to pay more then $225,000 fo (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm certain they did - on this case. But the most often they win a fight like this, the less often they'll need to in the future. And every case they don't have to defend is a win.