Comment by jrflo
24 days ago
That is why all patents exist. It's ridiculously time consuming and expensive to get a utility patent for anything. I invented something at my old company 5 years ago and the patent process is still ongoing, should hopefully get awarded this year. It costs tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees and you need to actively litigate infringements if you want to keep it. 99% of patents exist just for legal bullying and the other 1% are actually novel, useful inventions.
Patents also exist for defensive purposes e.g. if you go after us for x, we will countersue for y.
Google + Motorola aquisition vs Apple is a prime example.
> you need to actively litigate infringements if you want to keep it.
No you don't. That being said, what is the point of a patent if not to enforce the right of exclusivity it grants as to the invention?
> what is the point of a patent if not to enforce the right of exclusivity it grants
Usually it's to defend against another company using a "blocking patent" by pursuing you for infringing their patent which is built upon the thing you patented, doing the next step which was always obvious to you.
So that you can continue building what you started in the first place, instead of being shut down while someone else takes your idea forward.
Not for exclusivity.
>Usually it's to defend against another company using a "blocking patent" by pursuing you for infringing their patent which is built upon the thing you patented, doing the next step which was always obvious to you.
Would be pretty hard to sue someone for practicing a patent that cites that person in prior art who concurrently was inventing the same thing and would say how obvious it ones. You're going to tell me it's not so easy, but you completely made up some really narrow and specific situation anyway...
>Not for exclusivity.
It's only your right to exclude others from it that gives a patent any defense... it's all about exclusivity. That's the fundamental nature of property law.
2 replies →
Not saying it is not used for this purpose, but this just proves how broken the system actually is.
Yeah you're right, I was thinking of trademarks. I just think the system is very cumbersome and antiquated, these days it mostly serves to benefit patent lawyers rather than inventors and small businesses, aside from highly regulated fields where things move slower.
> Yeah you're right, I was thinking of trademarks. I just think the system is very cumbersome and antiquated
It's always something like this, from someone who didn't even realize they weren't actually talking about patents in the first place.
That poster mixed it up with trademarks, for which enforcement is required to maintain its validity.