Sentences with phrase «patent assertion»

The business model, however, has led to the trolls (more politely known as «patent assertion entities») becoming more aggressive as investors spur them to extract returns.

But there's nothing in the proposal to stop them from doing that: not every open source license that would comply with the policy requires that creators give up patent assertion rights.

The trolls, also known as «patent assertion entities,» neither make nor sell anything, but threaten to sue unsuspecting businesses with vague and dubious patent claims.

«Instead of creating new jobs and investing in new technologies, businesses large and small across many industries — from national realty, construction, and technology businesses to Main Street retail shops, hotels, grocers, convenience stores, and restaurants — continue to be forced to divert scarce resources to fighting frivolous lawsuits and overly broad claims made by Patent Assertion Entities, or «patent trolls».»

The America Invents Act requires the study of the positive and negative effects of patent assertion entities («PAEs») on the economy.

Cook Medical likewise holds up laches as one of the last defenses against patent assertion entities that delay filing suit as a weapon to make enormous settlement demands or demand higher licensing fees.

Those who may receive demand letters from Patent Assertion Entities with misleading demands should review the demands carefully and raised any concerns with the Bureau if appropriate.

The legislation is intended to make it more difficult for patent trolls — also known as patent assertion entities (PAEs)-- to file abusive lawsuits, without weakening the overall U.S. patent system.

The direct costs of NPEs are large relative to total business spending on research and development, which totaled $ 247 billion in 2009 (NSF 2012), implying that NPE patent assertions effectively impose a significant tax on investment in innovation.

Patent assertion agencies that rely on monetization as their sole income has been labeled as «patent trolls».

One study found that United States companies — most of them small or medium - sized — spent $ 29 billion in 2011 on patent assertion cases.

Recently, there has been a renewed discussion about Patent Assertion Entities, also known as non-practicing entitles (NPEs), or colloquially, patent trolls.

In 2011 patent assertion cases cost the U.S. companies $ 80 billion.

The Innovation Act, by contrast, specifically addresses certain abusive patent assertion activities.

Along with the letter, Rep. Lipinski released a report, called «Trolling for a Public Trough: How Patent Assertion Entities Cost Taxpayers.»

The undersigned organizations strongly encourage Congressional efforts to address abuses of the legal system by certain patent assertion entities, commonly referred to as patent trolls.

The more widely known the bill and the more likely it seems that the AG will become apprised of bad faith patent assertions, the higher the risks for patent trolls, and consequently the greater the likelihood that they will decide to leave Vermont businesses alone.

A patent troll operation may be called a «patent assertion company» or «entity» or a «non-manufacturing patentee.»

Because demand letters and pre-litigation negotiations rarely are made public, it is difficult to know how many patent assertion entities are active in Canada.

The Federal Court, where most patent litigation takes place, has a couple of features that make Canadian patent litigation less appealing to typical patent assertion entities than in the United States: limited availability of interlocutory injunctions and cost awards to the successful party.

Because patent assertion entities often use the threat of an injunction to try to obtain license or royalties fees from the defendants, pushing off the risk of an injunction for several years until after a full trial reduces the immediate risk to a defendant.

However, if the Supreme Court allowed the Federal Circuit decision to stand, design patent assertions by patent trolls (and also by operating companies who use them for purposes that have nothing to do with protecting and controlling their brand) would become a major problem.

Advising and representing a global technology company in a number of patent litigations, including defending it against standard - essential patent assertions and against the largest ever damages claim brought in patent infringement proceedings in Germany.

While the name «Motivational Health Messaging» may sound new, the actors behind it aren't: the people associated with MHM and its patent overlap with the people associated with notorious patent assertion entities Shipping & Transit, Electronic Communication Technologies, ArrivalStar, and Eclipse IP, who we've written about on numerous occasions.

But this very patent assertion is what keeps the big companies from stealing ideas and creating a market with unfair competition.

First among these flaws is the lack of oversight governing Patent Assertion Entities (PAEs), commonly referred to as «patent trolls.»

The White House also announced the release of a new paper by the National Economic Council and the Council of Economic Advisers, called Patent Assertion and U.S. Innovation.

The question of how to limit the activities of patent trolls (aka patent assertion entities (PAEs) or non-practicing entities (NPEs)-RRB- has been a hot topic over the past several years.

If we are to ensure that technologies and technologists don't end up frozen in carbonite, we need patent laws that free them from these excessive patent assertion threats that induce such fear.

Last year, the White House announced a patent troll initiative, and then the FTC announced a probe of patent assertions by these companies.

Nevertheless, innovators continue to face challenges from Patent Assertion Entities (PAEs), companies that, in the President's words «don't actually produce anything themselves,» and instead develop a business model «to essentially leverage and hijack somebody else's idea and see if they can extort some money out of them.»

CPF believes that Chairman Goodlatte's draft legislation, if enacted, would help address the abuse of our current patent system by patent assertion entities, commonly referred to as patent trolls.

Known officially as Patent Assertion Entities, they don't actually create new products, but instead make money by amassing a collection of patents and suing accused infringers.

Using a survey of defendants and a database of litigation, this paper estimates the direct costs to defendants arising from NPE patent assertions.

Represented five defendants in multiple suits against patent assertion entity's claims of patent infringement in the Eastern District of Texas.

As discussed in the FTC's recent report on patent assertion entities, 53 % of the studied cases were filed in the Eastern District of Texas.

AGs Support Federal Information - Gathering Project on «Patent Trolls» NAAG sent comments signed by 43 state and territorial attorneys general to the Federal Trade Commission in support of a proposed federal project to collect data and information about Patent Assertion Entities (PAEs), also known as patent trolls.

Legislators in eight states so far this year have approved laws designed to curb some abusive patent assertions.

Today, the negative impact of patent assertion entities, or so - called «patent trolls,» is being felt from Silicon Valley to Main Street, causing an $ 80 billion a year strain on our economy.»

In the past, trolls, also known as «patent assertion entities» (PAEs), were mostly viewed as a problem for the software industry.

The White House's Patent Assertion and Innovation report of June 2013 found that since 2005, the number of defendants sued by patent trolls had quadrupled.

LOT Network is the fastest - growing, cost - efficient preventative cure for the patent assertion entity (PAE) problem.

Additionally, the National Economic Council and the Council of Economic Advisers released a report, Patent Assertion and U.S. Innovation, detailing the challenges posed and necessity for bold legislative action.

The U.S. president made a number of recommendations to congress for legislative changes and announced executive actions to address these Patent Assertion Entities.

In early June, President Obama announced new initiatives to combat what he called, Patent Assertion Entities, which «don't actually produce anything themselves,» and instead develop a business model «to essentially leverage and hijack somebody else's idea and see if they can extort some money out of them.»

Those patent holders include Ericsson and, to a far greater extent, Nokia, a company that has sold patents to a number of NPEs in recent years and is itself increasinly turning into a patent assertion entity.

Another growing field in our work was helping SMEs in countering infringement assertions of non-practicing entities or patent assertion entities — pejoratively considered as «patent trolls» — based on outdated SEPs that have been cheaply purchased from telecommunication firms.