HDD Giants Sued Over Patent Violations

[alidan]

[citation][nom]bison88[/nom]The patent system is ridiculous along with copyright laws by standards shown to the public in the 1990's with emerging computer technologies to consumers on an unparalleled level. Yes, both laws need to be revised and "modernized" without being as heavily unrealistic as they are now. Rambus is a perfect example of abusing patents when 90% of its money comes from licensing fees from hundreds of patents. How a business can exist and produce next to nothing for the industry and world in general, is beyond me. Same goes with the Big Four whom control almost all of this nations entertainment. Raping artists of their content while with record ticket sales in theaters blaming pirates for a crappy movie not selling.[/citation]

correct me if im wrong, but they bought up the inventers pattent right?

legal fees cost somewhere along the lines of 30 grand a week depending on the court or the lawyer. im assuming that he had NO WAY IN HELL of paying that much, even if the case was a slam dunk. so he sold it to someone who did. that company may not make something themselves, but they hold the rights to inventions and may be the only way the original inventor can ever get some form of justice.

 

[sykozis]

[citation][nom]spectrewind[/nom]Seems to be a lot of people in here who will defend a corporation, in the wrong, because it will probably negatively affect purchasing prices.This guy is owed compensation.Lets throw this guy under the bus people! Right?If you were granted a patent and had a legal right to defend it, what would you do if it were violated?[/citation]

My issue is the fact that the patents are 13 years old....and the guy sold them. I don't believe a company should be able to purchase someone else's patent and then use them for financial gain. The party filing the suit, had no interest in these patents until they learned they could make a profit off the patents. Also, the original patent owner had the means to take legal action as most law firms, IF you have a realistic case, will defer payment until after the suit is settled. Also, my city provides lawyers specifically for matters such as this (which you don't have to pay unless you actually win)....I find it hard to believe my broke ass city can provide this service but no other city does...

 

[Jerky_san]

My problem is whats the chances that seagate and WD actually went and developed this as well with their own R&D. If they could prove they did and the guy took over 10 years to say something about it does he really have a case? I mean people can say what they want but I highly doubt 2 major companies with R&D that they have wouldn't of come up with this after x amount of time on their own..

 

[jomofro39]

I think everyone's main gripe about the patent system is the wordage. He filed a patent that “cover low-noise toroidal thin film read/write heads”. Cover, low-noise, thin, read/write? I mean, if somebody filed a patent that "covered high-resolution, big screen, multimedia/music player", would all the TV corporations have to shell out the money because he wrote it first. Can I file a patent that "covers flying cars, with the ability to levitate, either by aerodynamic manipulation or otherwise," and sue 15 years from now when someone takes the time to DESIGN it and MANUFACTURE it?
Did this guy actually design anything? Or did he have a pencil drawing of a stick and wrote "low-noise read/write device" above it? This is where the patent system is fundamentally flawed. Yes, we want to protect your ideas and inventions, NO, we do not want to give you a ticking money bomb while waiting for someone with ambition and the means necessary to take up a similar idea that sounds just like yours.

 

[kelemvor4]

Seems to me like the first patent suit I've seen recently that sounds like it has merit. Some individual invented something and a couple big companies blatantly stole the invention and sold it? That's exactly what the patent system is supposed to protect against.

Reminds me of the time someone broke into my house and stole my television and sold it to a pawn shop... If everything really is as it sounds someone at seagate and WD should be going to jail in my opinion.

I've got barracuda's in my rig right now but if the allegations here are true, I sure hope the offenders have to pay dearly.

 

[malikxaxu]

[citation][nom]jomofro39[/nom]I think everyone's main gripe about the patent system is the wordage. He filed a patent that “cover low-noise toroidal thin film read/write heads”. Cover, low-noise, thin, read/write? I mean, if somebody filed a patent that "covered high-resolution, big screen, multimedia/music player", would all the TV corporations have to shell out the money because he wrote it first. Can I file a patent that "covers flying cars, with the ability to levitate, either by aerodynamic manipulation or otherwise," and sue 15 years from now when someone takes the time to DESIGN it and MANUFACTURE it? Did this guy actually design anything? Or did he have a pencil drawing of a stick and wrote "low-noise read/write device" above it? This is where the patent system is fundamentally flawed. Yes, we want to protect your ideas and inventions, NO, we do not want to give you a ticking money bomb while waiting for someone with ambition and the means necessary to take up a similar idea that sounds just like yours.[/citation]

Dude, for the X-hundreth time, “cover low-noise toroidal thin film read/write heads” is probably the TITLE of the Patent and NOT the claims! It is the claims that confer the monopoly!!!!

To obtain the claims there must be enough description to enable a person skilled in the art to reproduce the claimed invention; thus your comment as to

"have a pencil drawing of a stick and wrote "low-noise read/write device" above it"

is probably ill-placed here. No Examiner, even overloaded with work, would allow a claim based on such description...

 

[Guest]

@dirty_luge and the others that said what if WD and seagate had developed the tech independently and not just poached his ideas, it's very simple, show them the proof, you are required to provide your method for solving a mathematical problem, complex problems can not simply be solved, they need to be worked through.

If indeed WD and seagate did develop this tech on their own (why the hell did they not patent it and ensure the other company does not have access to it....) they should have the documented IP that shows how the solution was derived, even eureka moments need to be fleshed out with real numbers sooner or later

@jomofro39
this is not a software patent, he did not patent the idea of 'low noise toroidal thin film read/write head', for this patent to have been validated he would have to show proof of concept, and by proof of concept it would have to show method for achieving low noise, and yes it could be a stick drawing if there was enough engineering/scientific background to fill in the blanks, if you spent a bit of time looking up the patent you can see it's pretty exhaustive

http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=VzUGAAAAEBAJ&dq=6195232

most hardware/chemical patents are, it's just the damn software stuff that kills the system....

 

[f-14]

"Rembrandt markets itself as a company that helps independent inventors "commercialize their intellectual property in a way that would never have been possible if they acted alone." Yet you can bet this development will provide more ammunition for critics of the American patent system."

sorry not every one is linus torvald and is a good little member of the communist party line commrade mossesgeld. the best things in life aren't free even franklin, edison and bell patented their stuff and AFTER they made their money on it they let it be widely used with out alot of restriction. the guy that invented this hasn't been paid a dime by the biggest names in the business that are profiting from it, i see no reason why he shouldn't get his share as long as they are getting theirs.

or maybe Tom editors won't mind their advertisors copying the site and posting it on their own sites with out compensating your owners who use that $ to pay your wage as you think every one should work for free.

 

[sykozis]

[citation][nom]jomofro39[/nom]I think everyone's main gripe about the patent system is the wordage. He filed a patent that “cover low-noise toroidal thin film read/write heads”. Cover, low-noise, thin, read/write? I mean, if somebody filed a patent that "covered high-resolution, big screen, multimedia/music player", would all the TV corporations have to shell out the money because he wrote it first. Can I file a patent that "covers flying cars, with the ability to levitate, either by aerodynamic manipulation or otherwise," and sue 15 years from now when someone takes the time to DESIGN it and MANUFACTURE it? Did this guy actually design anything? Or did he have a pencil drawing of a stick and wrote "low-noise read/write device" above it? This is where the patent system is fundamentally flawed. Yes, we want to protect your ideas and inventions, NO, we do not want to give you a ticking money bomb while waiting for someone with ambition and the means necessary to take up a similar idea that sounds just like yours.[/citation]

Western Digital and Seagate are being sued over a "Proof of Concept" patent....which makes it easier for the "inventor" to win, even though he didn't actually invent anything. Western Digital and Seagate will have to try to get this BS "Proof of Concept" patent invalidated.

"Proof of Concept" Patents are the biggest barrier to innovation. It shouldn't matter who had the idea first...it should matter who managed to actually develop it first.

 

[bebangs]

[citation][nom]AMD_pitbull[/nom]Honestly, tell me what I'm missing, cuz, I really don't see this guy in the wrong at all. I see Seagate and WD. Sorry, but, that would be like you going out infringing on a crap load of ideas, then bitching about getting sued when you knew they were already protected.[/citation]
he sold his invention to a patent troll company.

 

[g-thor]

I suspect that opinions are like bowel movements - we all have them, sometimes several times a day. Here's my opinion.

Part of the problem with the patent system (not just US, but overall) is that now, the inventions are pouring in at an unprecedented rate. There are too many out there, and searching if what you're patenting has already been patented, but under a description that is very different is really tough. That could be a part of the problem.

Someone asked, if WD and Seagate invented this independently, why didn't they patent it? Well, maybe they have applied for a patent and it hasn't been granted yet (as in "Patent Pending"). Or maybe they read all of the patents submitted, looking to steal someone else's ideas. Perhaps their R&D team did develop the tech independently and the legal team failed in their patent research. I don't think we forum crawlers have enough info yet, which ticks me off. I mean, I just want to grab a torch and pitchfork and march out yelling, "Hang them. Hang them high!"

Yes, I think the system needs to be reevaluated. Unfortunately, all the lawyers are too busy suing over patents.

 

[cletus_slackjawd]

Good article, thoughtful commentary, spell check needs to be run on the article though.

 

[wizardprang]

Let me get this straight: someone came up with an idea and patented it in 1997. Someone else used "his" idea, so he sold his rights to a Patent Troll.

What is the purpose of patents? Last time I looked, it was "To promote the progress of Science and the Useful Arts by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries." How is that purpose fulfilled here?

Had he actually "invented" something, or had made his case a decade ago, I would be more disposed to take this claim seriously, but the Patent Trolls are not "inventors", and in any case, it's too late; the horse is well and truly out of the barn.

 

[wizardprang]

Let me get this straight: someone came up with an idea and patented it in 1997. Someone else used "his" idea, so he sold his rights to a Patent Troll. Thirteen years after the patent was filed, the Trolls want their pound of flesh. Is that a fair summary?

What is the purpose of patents? Last time I looked, it was "To promote the progress of Science and the Useful Arts by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries." How is that purpose fulfilled here?

Had he actually "invented" something, or had made his case a decade ago, I would be more disposed to take this claim seriously, but the Patent Trolls are not "inventors", and in any case, it's too late; the horse is well and truly out of the barn.

 

[Guest]

@sykozis

the reason why a patent is granted for 20 years is because this gives the applicant plenty of time to attempt to move from proof of concept to realized product, as an individual it is extremely difficult to move from proof of concept to prototype, even simply ideas can cost up to 100k just to reach prototyping stage, no one should be penalized just because they do not have the resources to capitalize on their idea, if that were the cases then the mega corps would rule the world, If he was unable to capitalize on his idea he can seek someone who can, i dont think this guy was preventing innovation or progress, in fact being a small fry, he was probably more then happy to license out his tech to be used and further developed, just pay him his dues

 

[sykozis]

[citation][nom]payHimHisDues[/nom]@sykozisthe reason why a patent is granted for 20 years is because this gives the applicant plenty of time to attempt to move from proof of concept to realized product, as an individual it is extremely difficult to move from proof of concept to prototype, even simply ideas can cost up to 100k just to reach prototyping stage, no one should be penalized just because they do not have the resources to capitalize on their idea, if that were the cases then the mega corps would rule the world, If he was unable to capitalize on his idea he can seek someone who can, i dont think this guy was preventing innovation or progress, in fact being a small fry, he was probably more then happy to license out his tech to be used and further developed, just pay him his dues[/citation]

He's had 13 years to contact Western Digital and Seagate about the issue. Also, how many patents would developing his "idea" actually violate in the process? How many patents did HE violate within his own? Chances are, his patent will get invalidated.....

 

[bv90andy]

The only thing stupid about US Patents is that about anybody can file for one no mater how stupid it is. The fact that a patent was good enough for two companies to use it and being able to ask them to pay for the intellectual property they use is not stupid.