This page permanently redirects to gemini://gemini.techrights.org/2017/09/30/mpegla-and-fortress/.
Posted in Patents at 12:33 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Updates regarding MPEG-LA and Fortress, some of the world’s worst when it comes to raiding competitors (of clients) using patents
ONE of the world’s largest patent trolls is MPEG-LA. It’s a Microsoft- and Apple-connected patent troll which collects a ‘tax’ on almost everything “multimedia” and it recently started pursing a similar 'tax' on life itself — as gross as that notion may be now that the EPO — more so than the USPTO — grants patents on life.
=> ↺ MPEG-LA | recently started pursing a similar 'tax' on life itself | ↺ EPO | ↺ USPTO
Just before the weekend the patent maximalists recalled that “[i]n April this year, MPEG LA, issued an invitation to CRISPR-Cas9 patent holders to participate in a global CRISPR-Cas9 Joint Licensing Platform to create “a single non-exclusive, cost-effective, transparent license”.”
=> ↺ recalled
We last wrote about this in July.
Another Web site of patent maximalists (and even trolls that pay for bias) now says that “Fortress expects to be involved in a lot more litigation in the near future,” having accumulated patents with which to attack companies.
=> ↺ now says | accumulated patents with which to attack companies
To quote:
The hire of James clearly indicates that Fortress expects to be involved in a lot more litigation in the near future and that it is very serious about winning. As a senior player inside a major US law firm, James would have an income in the high six or low seven figures and would not have considered a switch for anything less; neither would he have swapped roles without being confident of the quality of the Fortress patents and of the level of support he would be given. For those that Fortress is litigating against – now and in the future – all these things might ring alarm bells.
IAM adds that “while it may be tougher to litigate, say, software-related patents in the US these days, if Fortress has done its job correctly, that will not matter too much as it will have other kinds of patents covering other jurisdictions to use…”
The concept of “software-related patents in the US” will be covered separately later tonight and tomorrow. When it comes to such patents, if the litigation target is poor enough, the legal defense (challenge) would be too expensive, so ‘protection’ money is likely to be shelled out.
Such is the problem with patent trolls. They oughtn’t exist in the first place and if he US stopped issuing software patents, many of these patent trolls would cease to exist/operate. █
Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Permalink Send this to a friend
=> Permalink | ↺ Send this to a friend
=> Techrights
➮ Sharing is caring. Content is available under CC-BY-SA.
text/gemini;lang=en-GBThis content has been proxied by September (3851b).