Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by LaminatorX on Saturday August 16 2014, @09:25AM   Printer-friendly
from the TROLLHAMMAR dept.

Ars Technica brings us a follow up on the Vringo case After years of hype, patent troll Vringo demolished on appeal

Today, the dream of getting rich by trading Vringo's lawsuit-driven stock is dead. A three-judge panel on the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has eviscerated (PDF) Vringo's patents, ruling 2-1 that they are obvious.

...

Two judges found that the two patents, numbered 6,775,664 and 6,314,420, were invalid because the prior art, viewed as a whole, rendered them obvious.

"I/P Engine's claimed invention is obvious as a matter of law because it simply combines content-based and collaborative filtering, two information filtering methods that were well-known in the art," stated the unsigned "per curiam" majority opinion.

Retaining a query for use in filtering was "entirely predictable and grounded in common sense," they wrote. Vringo lawyers further argued that earlier systems used "ranking" rather than "filtering," but the majority found that difference unconvincing.

A concurring opinion by Circuit Judge Haldane Mayer is more strongly worded.

Vringo's patents "simply recite the use of a generic computer to implement a well-known and widely practiced technique for organizing information," wrote Mayer. "If this determination had been made in the first instance as directed by the Supreme Court, unnecessary litigation, and nearly two weeks of trial and imposition on citizen jurors, could have been avoided."

The harsh result for Vringo was bad enough that at least three other patent troll stocks also saw modest price drops.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by pkrasimirov on Saturday August 16 2014, @10:16AM

    by pkrasimirov (3358) Subscriber Badge on Saturday August 16 2014, @10:16AM (#82040)

    Now that's about the right message to the trolls. Hit'em where it hurts -- on their profits. Shareholders, eh? All companies I've seen going down so fast always turned out to be financial pyramids.

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by jasassin on Saturday August 16 2014, @11:51AM

      by jasassin (3566) <jasassin@gmail.com> on Saturday August 16 2014, @11:51AM (#82048) Homepage Journal

      I agree. Then again, I'm against all software patents.

      --
      jasassin@gmail.com GPG Key ID: 0xE6462C68A9A3DB5A
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 16 2014, @02:55PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 16 2014, @02:55PM (#82074)

        It would be nice if the Patent Office in the USA stopped
        granting new software patents and let the existing ones
        expire naturally since they were awarded when they were
        'legal'.

        Years and years ago, Phil Katz (RIP) was able to patent PK-Zip.
        That patent should have expired around ten years ago.

        Back in 2000, RSA abandoned their public key cryptography
        patent a few months before it officially expired as a
        kind of marketing ploy.

        And people online HATED that UNISYS gave everybody grief
        over the .GIF file format with its imbeded, patented LZW
        data compression techniques. So much so I remember the
        protest site named 'burnallgifs' being set up. The
        LZW patent is expired and is fair game now.

        So yeah, the granting of software and 'with a
        computer/on the internet' business method patents is
        killing innovation and only making the lawyers of
        patent trolls rich....

      • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Saturday August 16 2014, @07:04PM

        by HiThere (866) on Saturday August 16 2014, @07:04PM (#82110) Journal

        Sorry, but only about 97% of them are unreasonable. That figure may be a bit low, as it's just a ball-park estimate. I'm sure, however, that there are one or two that are reasonable. Of course, they do require implementation hardware that isn't a general-purpose computer.

        --
        Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by hash14 on Saturday August 16 2014, @03:22PM

    by hash14 (1102) on Saturday August 16 2014, @03:22PM (#82080)

    Vringo's new patents were hyped by Silicon Valley personality James Altucher, who crowed about the genius of the named inventors on TechCrunch in an article entitled "Why Google Might Be Going to $0."

    You know you have a problem when your patent system causes people to cheer for legitimate companies to fail. This article just highlights the absurdity of it all and how the lawyers really don't want anyone to succeed but themselves. This really shows how patents are not about progress at all and really just about lining these guys' pockets at no matter the cost. If it comes about by way of some sort of innovation, then that's great. If it comes about but inhibiting progress (if not killing it altogether), well that's fine for them too.

    The problem will only be resolved when engineers and scientists (the ones doing the work) wipe themselves clean of these lawyers/parasites (the ones who only care about their own self-fulfillment).