Martha Stewart Out To Exterminate Patent Troll Lodsys

McGruber writes "Gigaom's Jeff John Roberts reports that Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia, Inc. (MSLO) has filed a lawsuit against Lodsys, a shell company that gained infamy two years ago by launching a wave of legal threats against small app makers, demanding they pay for using basic internet technology like in-app purchases or feedback surveys. In the complaint filed this week in federal court in Wisconsin, Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia asked a judge to declare that four magazine iPad apps are not infringing Lodsys' patents, and that the patents are invalid because the so-called inventions are not new. The complaint explained how Lodsys invited the company to 'take advantage of our program' by buying licenses at $5,000 apiece. It also calls the Wisconsin court's attention to Lodsys' involvement in more than 150 Texas lawsuits. In choosing to sue Lodsys and hopefully crush its patents, Martha Stewart is choosing a far more expensive option than simply paying Lodsys to go away."

Patents need to describe significant inventions

[MetalOne]

It seems to me that congress needs to revise the rules for obtaining and holding patents. I think that if the subject being patented can be recreated simply by having seen it in action or by a reading of the requirements, then it does not deserve a patent. So stuff like one-click or side to unlock would be excluded. There needs to be real hard work put forth on something before it should be considered an invention. We need to stop patenting mere ideas and obvious stuff. The hard work part should not be based on how hard the patent holder worked, but on how hard a challenger to the patent would have to work. I do think a good system of rules would be hard to develop. The system should not be easily gamed. If it proves too difficult to write such a set of rules, then it seems to me that having a patent system is bad idea. Furthermore, most all inventions are going to be incremental improvements. Most fields have lots of people working in them. So if the increment of improvement is small and there are many people in the field, then clearly it won't be much work for others to achieve the same result, and hence the first to file concept seems grossly unfair. So now you have to decide what is a significant enough increment for something to warrant a patent. Perhaps if you have a mind like Tesla one could truly invent something stunning, but even then I have my doubts, for every Tesla there seems to a Marconi.

Patent trolls really bit the wrong organization

[Beeftopia]

They went after the National Association of Realtors. [realtor.org] The fifth largest all-time donor to federal politicians since 1989. [opensecrets.org]

When big political donors get upset, politicians will act.

Long-term thinking

[Okian Warrior]

This is an example of long-term thinking.

People only look at their personal short-term gain, with no thought about the long-term consequences. It's paying the Danegeld [wikipedia.org], nothing less.

I read all the time about this-or-that injustice and oh! the outrage it sparks, but no one wants to do the right thing and fight because it's so hard!

When a cop violates your civil rights, do you take him to court? If no one does, then cops feel free to do whatever they want, and rights violations are everywhere.

When the BSA (business software alliance) demands to search your office without a warrant, when the RIAA offers to settle for less than the court costs, when the border patrol stops and searches your car, or when patent trolls demand license fees, it's all the same: bullies feel free to operate, it's the Danegeld in another form.

If people stood up for their rights and took the bullies to task, there would be a lot less bullying. It would be expensive for the first few people, but in the long run it would be better for everyone. Consider it an investment in your childrens' future: if you fight now, they won't have to fight later.

Next time you read about an injustice, think about what the victim could do to take the bullies to task. Then ask "why didn't they do that?"

Re:...and suddenly

[Anonymous Coward]

I worked on her TV show for 4 seasons (which is why I'm posting as AC - you never know) - and I can assure you, not only is she aware, but once someone came to her with this, she became a driving force behind it. She may not understand the nitty-gritty details, but once she's been told that someone's fucking with her, there's no messing around. She's in it for the kill.

Re:HQ approval

[pspahn]

If anyone would like more proof that it is her in charge, give "The Martha Rules" a read.

Alternatively, if you don't give a shit about this but you're starting a small business, give it a read anyway, you'll thank her later.

Re:...and suddenly

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a friend who worked for a couple of summers at her greenhouse and farmstand. This is basically minimum wage work at a small sideline business that isn't even supposed to make money so much as slightly offset the cost of having a full time maintenance and landscaping staff on her very large personal home and adjoining estate in Maine.

My friend never directly reported to her, and only "met" her insofar as on a handful of occasions she saw fit to check on things or wanted to have a camera crew shoot something in that area, but there was never any question that Martha knew what was going on, knew my friend worked there and kept tabs on the staff.

So anyway, yeah, I'd have to believe that legal at least ran this by her, and that she is ultimately calling the shots on this.