[citation][nom]SAL-e[/nom]@DRosencraftThis 'innovative' litigation was tried (and lost) by Copyright Troll by the name "Righthaven". He (Righthaven) sued several bloggers on behave of Las Vegas Review Journal by obtaining only "license to sue".Nevada (and Colorado) Courts "Dismisses Righthaven's Lawsuit for Lack of Standing". [1]So, unless Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute has sold the patent in question to Dynamic Advances, they (Dynamic Advances) should expect same faith as Righthaven. The lawyer behind Righthaven is bankrupted and defended in several counter-lawsuits.[1] http://righthavenlawsuits.com/[/citation]
To begin with, Righthaven got the patent rights after the fact. That doesn't seem to be the case here. Second, Righthaven was suing a bunch of people without actually contacting any of them first. In this case you basically have one company suing another company, which is a slightly different situation. Finally, you're talking with Righthaven about cases in Nevada and Colorado. I'm not saying New York courts are gonna ignore those cases, but you are dealing with a different court that very well could reach a different conclusion. I'm not gonna pick a side here because I don't know enough about the case, I'm simply explaining the legal theory behind it thus far.