Quote:
Originally posted by On n'a qu'une vie
From the LT article I posted above
<<"Sophisticated clients understand that the time to spend money is upfront, not down the road when you're in litigation," says Foley. >>
Does anyone really believe this statement? Or believe that clients believe this statement, sophisticated or otherwise?
|
Well, I'm not sure I'm talking your language, but tell me if this fits. IBM files the most patent applications in the U.S. every year. The most by miles that is. They also send boxes of "information disclosures" to the patent office to make public the record of what their people have submitted as inventions (though they won't prosecute the applications). The invention disclosure submissions could be considered clearly defensive measures taken against potential litigation. The applications might be more of an offensive weapon, though sometimes the offense that might be taken is merely the best defense.
There is a famous story from Sun or one of the other Ca. tech companies about having a box of patents sent to them by IBM lawyers with a potential-infringement letter. Sun's patent lawyers went over the patents and determined that each and every one was not infringed by any Sun product. They had a meeting with IBM's people and explained, in detail, how they avoided infringement.
Please understand that this is not meant to be libelous, and only paraphrases what I am certain that I read in an article within the last 18 months, but supposedly IBM's lawyers ended the meeting by saying something like "well, that is the first 25 patents, should we get started on the next 50,000 that are still in effect?"
I'm not sure, but I think the story ended with Sun paying a large sum for a global license.
It probably can't be called defensive without additional facts, but it certainly is intimidating to anyone that would actually try and initiate anything against IBM.
Hello
