Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Patents Businesses The Courts

Intellectual Ventures Tied To 1,300 Shell Companies 140

Posted by timothy
from the such-pretty-shells dept.
dgharmon writes "New research (PDF) shows that Intellectual Ventures is tied to at least 1,300 shell companies whose sole purpose is to coerce real companies into buying patent license that they don't want or need. Those who resist the 'patent trolls' are dragged into nightmarish lawsuits."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Intellectual Ventures Tied To 1,300 Shell Companies

Comments Filter:
  • by Yvanhoe (564877) on Sunday August 12, 2012 @04:43PM (#40966501) Journal
    It is strange but many IT entrepreneurs in France don't see the silicon valley as a dreamland. This is a place where you go to get investors, but you certainly don't open a company there. Software patents is really a strategical consideration that make our (moderately) higher tax rates seem a worthy cost.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 12, 2012 @05:18PM (#40966807)
    Fuck Nathan and his buddies Balmer and Elop. These asshats know exactly what they are doing. This is a systemic campaign to abuse the system to destroy any FOSS competition in the market.
  • Re:FTFA (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Smallpond (221300) on Sunday August 12, 2012 @07:31PM (#40967743) Homepage Journal

    Patent trolling took off after the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office began issuing a flood of questionable âoebusiness methodâ patents related to things like software and, believe it or not, a crustless peanut butter and jelly sandwich. In 2006, lawyers used such a patent to threaten Research in Motion with an injunction against the BlackBerry and extract a $612 million payout.

    Well that's clearly why the BlackBerry has been having trouble in the market, RIM spent too much of their product development time working on sandwiches, and patent infringing sandwiches at that.

    Blackberry is an obvious mistake. The crustless PB&J uses strawberry.

    Anyway, why hasn't someone pointed out that Intellectual Ventures was founded by the ex-CTO of Microsoft Nathan Myhrvold and still partners with Microsoft on patent deals. Are all the MS haters asleep?

  • by Taco Cowboy (5327) on Sunday August 12, 2012 @08:25PM (#40968179) Journal

    I built my first company in the Silicon Valley, sold it, build my second company in Silicon Valley, sold it, and build my third company in Asia
     
    Why?
     
    Not because of "cheaper labor", hacking cost is universal, whether it's in Silicon Valley or in Asia
     
    I built my third company in Asia because I could plenty of talents in Asia, while on the other hand, the younger batch who moved to Silicon Valley are there not because of their interest in hacking but because of money - Technology do not progress because of money, technology progress because of people who want to do something different
     

  • by phantomfive (622387) on Sunday August 12, 2012 @08:37PM (#40968283) Journal

    Also, see Judge Willian Alsup and Judge Richard Posner.

    Yes, these two are amazing. Any judge who learns to program Java for a trial deserves credit.

  • by ShanghaiBill (739463) on Sunday August 12, 2012 @09:36PM (#40968723)

    It is strange but many IT entrepreneurs in France don't see the silicon valley as a dreamland.

    I live in Silicon Valley, and I know about a dozen current or former French citizens working here. Starting an IT business in France will give you plenty of bureaucracy and taxes, but no protection from patent lawsuits. You can be sued anywhere you do business, and for most IT companies that means worldwide from the very beginning. I started my first company more than twenty years ago, and was surprised when I announced my first product and my first five orders were all from outside the USA.

  • by Areyoukiddingme (1289470) on Sunday August 12, 2012 @09:49PM (#40968801)

    If corporations were people, it would take 9 months of effort and hundreds of pounds of input to create one and you wouldn't be finished until you had successfully pushed a watermelon through a garden hose.

    Instead we have this company spawning 1300 "children" in a year or two. Ridiculous.

    Sounds like Charlie Stross got it right in Accelerando--as a reaction to those 1300 corporations, useful corporations with actual products are going to have to react defensively, and in an exactly reciprocal fashion. Samsung is going to have to spawn 1300 child corporations and use them to hide their assets. "Oh, you were trying to sue for infringement of your phone interface? I'm sorry, Samsung Electronics 867 doesn't produce that phone. Try Samsung Electronics 335." *ring* "Samsung Electronics 335. Oh, no, you can't sue us for that phone interface. We sold it yesterday. To whom? Call back tomorrow." *ring* "Samsung Electronics 335. Yes, we sold that phone interface to Samsung Electronics 779." *ring* "Samsung Electronics 779. Oh no, you can't sue us for that phone interface. We sold it yesterday. To whome? Call back tomorrow..."

If A = B and B = C, then A = C, except where void or prohibited by law. -- Roy Santoro

Working...