Google Wins $1.3 Million From Patent Troll 35
An anonymous reader writes Earlier this year, Google sued Beneficial Innovations for breach of contract, ostensibly in defense of its Doubleclick ad technology clients against whom Beneficial Innovations had filed suits despite Google having already paid licensing fees for the technology. Following Google's jury trial win, the company was originally awarded only 'nominal damages of $1 and a judicial order stopping Beneficial from going after more Doubleclick customers.' Now, however, the presiding judge has ruled that Google is entitled to some attorneys' fees in the amount of $1.3 million (PDF).
Judicial Order (Score:3)
Re:Judicial Order (Score:5, Interesting)
Short version: yes, how else are you going to practically enforce that provision?
The long version touches on due process, and how summary dismissals aren't enough of a disincentive, but I think if you tried to imagine the full narrative yourself, you'd see the same problems.
Re: (Score:3)
People who continuously pay $1.3 million settlements can't afford lawyers and court fees after a while.
Re:Judicial Order (Score:5, Interesting)
assuming they ever pay. I've been involved in a few court ordered settlements before and have never seen a penny. In all cases the offender simply made it more expensive to get the money than the money was worth. It's a very easy thing to do. It's unfortunately Judges aren't more sympathetic in these sorts of cases.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but now that's something that's executively enforceable. The cops CAN come knock down your door over it, and the state use of force would be justified.
Our whole legal system is a giant fence that's designed to protect you from someone bigger, more numerous, and better armed from messing with you, until we're good and sure that it's better off that someone did.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but now that's something that's executively enforceable. The cops CAN come knock down your door over it, and the state use of force would be justified.
But they wont. Trust me, I tried, they don't care. You can go to court, but just to file is $1k and if there's any legal work at all you're in the tens of thousands immediately. AND, in the end, even if you do win, they will likely just file bankruptcy and laugh at you.
Re: Judicial Order (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I've been involved in a few court ordered settlements before and have never seen a penny.
Today's your lucky day! [google.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The incentive is to prosecute the troll lawyers for barratry. Too bad DAs only selectively administer the law when it comes to keeping their colleagues in line.
I would argue relief is takeover (Score:2)
"you, troll, die! all assets to the defendant. if this is not effected within 5 business days, this court will personally come after your sorry ass with an Elfin sword."
something like that.
Re: (Score:3)
Is this really a win? (Score:4, Insightful)
despite Google having already paid licensing fees for the technology.
Since Google is paying the patent troll licensing fees, this doesn't sound much like a win.
The article also doesn't explain why someone would sue even though they were being paid. Did Beneficial Innovations (OMG, even the name is trolling) not realize these customers were covered?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Is this really a win? (Score:5, Informative)
The article also doesn't explain why someone would sue even though they were being paid. Did Beneficial Innovations (OMG, even the name is trolling) not realize these customers were covered?
If I'm reading the follow through articles right, Google and Beneficial reached an agreement about Google using the patents. This included terms about Google's customers using Google products based on those patents. Beneficial tried to argue that some organisations were using the patent-involving products outside the terms of the agreement with Google, and so were violating the patents themselves. They tried to sue those organisations, so Google stepped in to slap them down.
Not really over patents (Score:5, Informative)
That's not to say that there aren't people winning money from patent trolls - there are, in other cases, and the lower standard for awarding fees to the defendant is a result of the Supreme Court's decision in Octane Fitness last April. But this isn't one of those - this is more like Google suing the guy who paints the fences at the Googleplex for doing a shitty job, and then getting attorney's fees under their existing contract.
Re: (Score:3)
Google paid the [legal] protection money for its affiliates, and the racket still smashed in the windows of the affiliates' shops.
Any two-bit thug can tell you how that works out.
That's all? (Score:3)
Just $ 1.3 million for attorney's fees? And I've been telling clients they should have $ 3 million set aside for fees if they want to pursue a patent lawsuit.
But, I guess this is more breach of contract than a real patent suit, so maybe the "low" fees aren't too surprising.
Re: (Score:2)
Just $ 1.3 million for attorney's fees? And I've been telling clients they should have $ 3 million set aside for fees if they want to pursue a patent lawsuit.
But, I guess this is more breach of contract than a real patent suit, so maybe the "low" fees aren't too surprising.
That - this suit didn't really have anything to do with patents, there was no claim construction or Markman hearing, there weren't prior art searches, invalidity contentions, expert reports, etc. It was just a straightforward breach of contract.
Re: (Score:3)
So we let douchebags get away with being douchebags because we don't like the douchebags they're being douchebags to?
What could possibly go wrong?
found money (Score:3)