So from my previous post, you know the basics of the Apple vs VirnetX patent lawsuit. In this post, I'm going to try and dig deeper into what this case is fundamentally based on: "patent trolling".
Patent trolling is essentially when a company owns many patents and licenses or sues over them. They're usually comprised solely of litigators, since they spend most of their time in court. A patent troll never has the intention of actually creating a product based on their patents -- all their money comes from licensing and lawsuits. Most of the time, the company doesn't create the patents by themselves, but rather buy them from inventors with cash.
To me, both sides have their respective arguments. To argue for Apple, I say that this case shows a loophole in our intellectual property system here in the United States -- or even the world. Morally, the purpose of creating a patent is to prove your intellectual work and claim rights to it, so that you can develop a product eventually without a competitor stealing your idea. Additionally, one can argue that other people can build on your patent to further advance society. But VirnetX also has an argument: Apple should have done its due diligence and notice that they were infringing on somebody's patents. Legally, they own the patents and have a right to license it out to others for use.
It's really hard to say who's right and who's wrong. But at the end of the day, this suit is chump change for Apple who currently has $234 billion in the bank.
https://youtu.be/cTf4WFIqILY
Shauray,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed your outlook on the case. I like how you take a conversational tone in your blog posts, making it very simple and easy to read. Under the assumption that a firm has large amount of cash at hand, do you think businesses have an incentive to intentionally infringe on a patent, rather than paying them money for constant R&D?
Keep up the good work!
Shauray,
ReplyDeleteI really liked that you viewed the case from both Apple's and VirnetX's perspectives. I thought that it was interesting how you stated that the large company should look out for potential infringement but at the same time patents should be able to be built upon to further society. I really liked this dichotomy that you presented, because I wouldn't know which I would say is more important in a legal sense.
Hey Shauray,
ReplyDeleteI liked the detail you provided with the company's background and other similar lawsuits they've started. It's good to have a solid background in a lawsuit, which is what I got from your post. Looking forward to reading more!
Best,
Aditya
Hey Shauray,
ReplyDeleteI found your final point to be quite interesting regarding the "chump change for Apple". My only point is, what if Apple opens itself up to many more patent trolls in the future by settling? Regardless, great post as always and I liked your picture as well.
Thanks
Sid
Hi Shauray,
ReplyDeleteI liked how you considered both sides of the story for the Apple-Virnetx case, rather than focusing solely on the fact that Virnetx is a patent troll. I hadn't thought about the Apple side of the case in the manner that you presented in your blog, so that was very interesting.
Hi Shauray,
ReplyDeleteI thought your post showed great insight into both Apple's and VirnetX's side of the case. You shared a refreshing perspective after the myriad of posts on the specifics and hard facts that many of us had a focused on. As a recommendation, I would have loved to hear your own thoughts. Even though it's hard choosing a side, it would have been awesome to learn more about your thinking process. Thanks!
Hi Shauray,
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading your post on the details of the Apple v. VirnetX case! We've been consistently talking about patent trolls and I must admit I've had some confusion as to what exactly patent trolls are and how exactly they function; you clarified it well for me! I also enjoyed you explained your thoughts on the case whereas many people (myself included) merely presented technical details which are irrelevant to the average person. I wonder if Blogger has a polling feature you could use in the future? To see how people would vote on the case!