Deeplinks Blog posts about Patent Trolls
Earlier this year, together with Durie Tangri, EFF stepped in to defend a photo hobbyist facing a patent suit. The patent owner, Garfum.com Corporation, claimed to have invented competitions on social networks where users vote for the winner. Garfum recently abandoned its lawsuit. Yesterday, we filed a motion asking the court to declare the case ‘exceptional’ and award our client attorneys’ fees.
Today, in Williamson v. Citrix, the Federal Circuit overruled its ill-advised case law that has been one of the primary drivers of overbroad software patents. The court finally recognized that patent applicants cannot bypass certain limits on patent rights solely by avoiding magic words. EFF filed an amicus brief urging the court to do just that.
Imagine the Wright brothers, after they invented their airplane, filed for a patent claiming “a machine for flying.” Essentially claiming a machine for what it does rather than how it does it. This is known as “functional claiming.”
One of the best weapons a patent troll has in extorting an undeserved settlement is the cost of litigation. If a defendant knows that a case will drag on for several months, or even years, and will require her to spend significant resources to prevail, she is more likely to give in to pressure from a patent troll.
Recently, the Eastern District of Texas made that weapon even sharper.
Earlier this week, we announced that an Atlanta-based patent attorney, Scott A. Horstemeyer, had sued EFF for defamation. Horstemeyer alleged that he was defamed by the April Stupid Patent of the Month blog post. We explained that there were no false facts in the post to retract or correct, and the opinions we expressed are founded on the undisputed facts and are fully protected by the Constitution.
On May 26, 2015, Atlanta-based attorney Scott A. Horstemeyer sued the Electronic Frontier Foundation alleging that he was defamed by the April Stupid Patent of the Month blog post. Horstemeyer has demanded that EFF remove the post and publish an editorial repudiating it. EFF has declined this request and stands by the opinions expressed in the post.
We are very disappointed that an attorney would attempt to silence criticism with misguided and counterproductive litigation, and will defend against this lawsuit vigorously. As our counsel at the law firm of Bryan Cave have explained to Horstemeyer, there were no false facts in the post to retract or correct, and the opinions expressed are protected by the Constitution.
Pages
Subscribe to EFF Updates
Deeplinks Archives
Deeplinks Topics
- Fair Use and Intellectual Property: Defending the Balance
- Free Speech
- Innovation
- International
- Know Your Rights
- Privacy
- Trade Agreements and Digital Rights
- Security
- State-Sponsored Malware
- Abortion Reporting
- Analog Hole
- Anonymity
- Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement
- Biometrics
- Bloggers' Rights
- Broadcast Flag
- Broadcasting Treaty
- CALEA
- Cell Tracking
- Coders' Rights Project
- Computer Fraud And Abuse Act Reform
- Content Blocking
- Copyright Trolls
- Council of Europe
- Cyber Security Legislation
- CyberSLAPP
- Defend Your Right to Repair!
- Defending Digital Voices
- Development Agenda
- Digital Books
- Digital Radio
- Digital Video
- DMCA
- DMCA Rulemaking
- Do Not Track
- DRM
- E-Voting Rights
- EFF Europe
- Encrypting the Web
- Export Controls
- FAQs for Lodsys Targets
- File Sharing
- Fixing Copyright? The 2013-2015 Copyright Review Process
- FTAA
- Genetic Information Privacy
- Hollywood v. DVD
- How Patents Hinder Innovation (Graphic)
- International Privacy Standards
- Internet Governance Forum
- Law Enforcement Access
- Legislative Solutions for Patent Reform
- Locational Privacy
- Mandatory Data Retention
- Mandatory National IDs and Biometric Databases
- Mass Surveillance Technologies
- Medical Privacy
- National Security and Medical Information
- National Security Letters
- Net Neutrality
- No Downtime for Free Speech
- NSA Spying
- OECD
- Online Behavioral Tracking
- Open Access
- Open Wireless
- Patent Busting Project
- Patent Trolls
- Patents
- PATRIOT Act
- Pen Trap
- Policy Analysis
- Printers
- Public Health Reporting and Hospital Discharge Data
- Reading Accessibility
- Real ID
- RFID
- Search Engines
- Search Incident to Arrest
- Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act
- Social Networks
- SOPA/PIPA: Internet Blacklist Legislation
- Student and Community Organizing
- Surveillance and Human Rights
- Surveillance Drones
- Terms Of (Ab)Use
- Test Your ISP
- The "Six Strikes" Copyright Surveillance Machine
- The Global Network Initiative
- The Law and Medical Privacy
- Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement
- Travel Screening
- TRIPS
- Trusted Computing
- Video Games
- Wikileaks
- WIPO
- Transparency
- Uncategorized
eff.org/nsa-spying
