Drew Curtis: How I beat a patent troll

TL;DR

This content discusses a lawsuit faced by Fark.com and other companies against a patent troll, highlighting flaws in the patent system.

Transcript

Last January, my company, Fark.com, was sued along with Yahoo, MSN, Reddit, AOL, TechCrunch and others by a company called Gooseberry Natural Resources. Gooseberry owned a patent for the creation and distribution of news releases via email. (Laughter) Now it may seem kind of strange that such a thing can actually be patented, but it does happen all... Read More

Key Insights

• 🙃 Patents for emerging technologies, such as email news releases, are often granted, causing lawsuits and settlements with patent trolls in the tech industry.
• 💡 In patent infringement cases, the burden of proof lies with the defendant, leading to high legal costs and lengthy defense processes.
• 💰 Settlements with patent trolls are often cheaper and less time-consuming than fighting the lawsuit, leading many companies to settle even if they are not infringing on the patent.
• 🔍 Requesting proof of infringement, such as screenshots, can lead to a favorable settlement or even dismissal of the case if the evidence is lacking.
• 🤝 Teaming up with larger companies to defend against patent troll lawsuits can be difficult, as they may choose to settle individually for financial reasons.
• ❌ Fighting the infringement charge rather than the patent itself can be a more feasible strategy in defending against patent trolls.
• 💪 Making it clear that you have limited funds or are willing to use all resources to fight the case can discourage patent trolls from pursuing the lawsuit.
• ️ Patent trolls have a negative impact on the economy and use the money they earn from settlements to file more lawsuits, creating a cycle of damage.
• 😕 The conflicting goals of different industries and their desired outcomes for the patent system make it challenging to find a comprehensive solution to the patent troll problem.

Questions & Answers

Q: What was the reason why Fark.com and other companies were sued by Gooseberry Natural Resources?

Fark.com and the other companies were sued because Gooseberry owned a patent for the creation and distribution of news releases via email, and they claimed that these companies were infringing on their patent.

Q: How did Fark.com discover that they were not in violation of the patent held by Gooseberry Natural Resources?

Fark.com realized that they were not in violation of the patent because the patent specifically referred to news releases, but in the mainstream media world, news releases are commonly known as press releases (P.R.), and Fark.com deals with news, not press releases.

Q: What is the burden of proof in patent troll lawsuits?

In patent troll lawsuits, the burden of proof that you did not infringe on the patent lies on the defendant. This means that the defendant has to prove that they do not infringe on the patent being sued upon. It is a challenging and time-consuming process.

Q: Why did the larger companies settle out of the lawsuit brought by Gooseberry Natural Resources, even though they were not in violation of the patent?

The larger companies settled out of the lawsuit because it was cheaper for them to settle than to fight the lawsuit. Settling was a more cost-effective option, even though they knew they were not infringing on the patent.

Q: How did Fark.com manage to avoid a non-disclosure agreement in their settlement with Gooseberry Natural Resources?

During the settlement process, when Fark.com received their copy of the agreement, they struck out the non-disclosure agreement clause. Surprisingly, the agreement came back signed without the non-disclosure agreement. This allowed Fark.com to openly discuss the case without any restrictions.

Q: What lessons did Drew Curtis, the speaker in the video, learn from his experience with the patent troll lawsuit?

Drew Curtis learned three important lessons from his experience. Firstly, he advises to fight the infringement rather than the patent itself, as proving infringement is easier. Secondly, he suggests making it clear from the beginning that either you have no money or that you would rather spend it on your attorney than on the patent troll. Lastly, he recommends making the process as annoying and difficult as possible for the patent troll to discourage them from pursuing the case.

Q: What does Drew Curtis propose as a solution for the patent troll problem?

Drew Curtis admits he doesn't have a definite solution for the patent troll problem. However, he jokingly suggests patenting his own idea of patent infringement via mobile devices, with the intention of using it to deter patent trolls and ultimately render them obsolete.

Summary & Key Takeaways

• The company Fark.com was sued by a company called Gooseberry Natural Resources over a patent for creating and distributing news releases via email.

• Many companies settle with patent trolls because it is cheaper and less of a distraction than fighting the lawsuits.

• The speaker learned three lessons from the case: fight the infringement, make it clear that you will not pay, and make the process as annoying and difficult as possible for the trolls.