PublishedDecember 15, 2014

A New Troll Feeds on Patent Trolls

This has to be one of my favorite stories this year: it seems that patent trolls are the victims of extortion by a new breed of troll (registration required).

Here’s the scenario: a patent troll files a suit (or suits) and wins a big judgment. Another company then files an [define term=”inter partes review”] petition with the [define term=”PTAB”] against the patent troll’s patent and demands a payoff from the patent troll in exchange for withdrawing the petition. If the troll doesn’t pay, it risks losing its patent in the IPR.

I would be more upset about this if I could stop laughing, although it’s hardly a positive development. It can’t be good to have more trolls, even if their victims are patent trolls. Unless of course this new twist helps spotlight dysfunctionality in the patent system for the new Congress.

I am reminded of one of my favorite quotes from the great William Shatner in Airplane 2:

Or, a more musical version of the same idea:

 

Matt Levy

Previously, Matt was patent counsel at the Computer & Communications Industry Association

Josh Landau

Patent Counsel, CCIA

Joshua Landau is the Patent Counsel at the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA), where he represents and advises the association regarding patent issues.  Mr. Landau joined CCIA from WilmerHale in 2017, where he represented clients in patent litigation, counseling, and prosecution, including trials in both district courts and before the PTAB.

Prior to his time at WilmerHale, Mr. Landau was a Legal Fellow on Senator Al Franken’s Judiciary staff, focusing on privacy and technology issues.  Mr. Landau received his J.D. from Georgetown University Law Center and his B.S.E.E. from the University of Michigan.  Before law school, he spent several years as an automotive engineer, during which time he co-invented technology leading to U.S. Patent No. 6,934,140.

Follow @PatentJosh on Twitter.

More Posts

Much Ado About Injunctions: Redux

Patent policy debates have raged since 2006 when the Supreme Court decided eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, L.L.C., 547 U.S. 388 (2006). Critics of eBay frequently cite the decision as having effectively en...

Tuesday Markup of Litigation Funding Legislation

Although John Squires is busy destroying the PTAB—as of last week, he has now gone 0 for 34 on allowing institution of IPR petitions he reviews—the story in Congress is more positive. Tomorrow, t...

Step 1: Destroy IPR.  Step 2: ???  Step 3: Profit.

Last week, the USPTO issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) containing major changes to the institution process for inter partes review.  Combined with other changes made by the USPTO, inc...

Subscribe to Patent Progress

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.