SoftBank-owned Patent Troll, Using Monkey Selfie Law Firm, Sues To Block Covid-19 Testing, Using Theranos Patents (techdirt.com) 159
Mike Masnick, reporting for TechDirt: It's a story involving patents, patent trolling, Covid-19, Theranos, and even the company that brought us all WeWork: SoftBank. Oh, and also Irell & Manella, the same law firm that once claimed it could represent a monkey in a copyright infringement dispute. You see, Irell & Manella has now filed one of the most utterly bullshit patent infringement lawsuits you'll ever see. They are representing "Labrador Diagnostics LLC" a patent troll which does not seem to exist other than to file this lawsuit, and which claims to hold the rights to two patents (US Patents 8,283,155 and 10,533,994) which, you'll note, were originally granted to Elizabeth Holmes and Theranos -- the firm that shut down in scandal over medical testing equipment that appears to have been oversold and never actually worked. Holmes is still facing federal charges of wire fraud over the whole Theranos debacle. However, back in 2018, the remains of Theranos sold its patents to Fortress Investment Group. Fortress Investment Group is a SoftBank-funded massive patent troll. You may remember the name from the time last fall when Apple and Intel sued the firm, laying out how Fortress is a sort of uber-patent troll, gathering up a bunch of patents and then shaking down basically everyone. Lovely, right? So, this SoftBank-owned patent troll, Fortress, bought up Theranos patents, and then set up this shell company, "Labrador Diagnostics," which decided that right in the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic it was going to sue one of the companies making Covid-19 tests, saying that its test violates those Theranos patents, and literally demanding that the court bar the firm from making those Covid-19 tests.
First, Kill all the lawyers. (Score:5, Insightful)
This is the end of the world, isn't it?
No, first, kill all the killers! (Score:2)
Oh, wait!
Re:First, Kill all the lawyers. (Score:4)
Why did New York get the lawyers and New Jersey the nuclear waste-dumps?
New Jersey had first choice.
A German friend of mine commented the attempted take-over of that Germany company working on a vaccine with: At least the vaccine would get approval quickly. Leaving how long it normally takes to get FDA approval (my argument at the time), this is a show stopper for any moves like that and m-a-y-b-e a trigger for a reform of the patent process.
If people die because of this lawsuit and it is then found to be frivolous, they have to be prosecuted for murder. Nothing less.
I read Thanos... (Score:2)
Assuming flying monkeys, robotic corvidae and quite skillful trolls . . .
. . . sounds about right.
National Emergency (Score:3)
Re:National Emergency (Score:4)
Both of these quite obviously build on a massive amount of existing work, and this is plain from the massive number of citations that each contains. I'm not an expert in the field so it's difficult to tell precisely how little innovation is involved in this, but at best this seems like a repackaging of old technology with an "but on the internet!" type of kicked added on. I'm not sure that the testing method being suggested in the patent is in any way novel.
However, unless the company has access to any of the devices doing COVID-19 testing then how would they know it actually violates their patent. There are several dependent claims for each patent that would be trivially easy to get around which would make other implementations non-infringing for one or more reasons.
Re: (Score:2)
I think the copyright office should start yanking more of these patents that aren't novel.
I think it would be more effective if the patent office invalidated those patents. 8^)
Re: (Score:2)
Those are actually good patents. The problem is that a patent is supposed to be on an implementation of an idea. You're not supposed to be able to patent an idea itself [legalzoom.com]. If someone else comes up with a device or system wh
Comment removed (Score:3)
Morons. Suicide by Patent. (Score:5, Insightful)
Not the brightest bunch are they?
If this gets into mainstream media, I can see some serious backlash happening.
Wishfully wanting this to weaken patents over all and perhaps destroy a few patent trolls along the way.
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, patent law is less bad than copyright law.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
He didn't say it was good, just that it was less bad than copyright law. This should give you some idea as to just how bad copyright law is.
Re: (Score:2)
Very true.
Re: (Score:3)
Patent abuse slows technological development for everyone (and there are arguments to be made that so does proper use). When was the last time something actually valuable was stopped by copyright law?
I mean we all like our music, books, and movies - but get rid of all of them and we'd just find other ways to amuse and distract ourselves.
Re: Morons. Suicide by Patent. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
From the follow-up articles I've seen, the patent troll is claiming that they didn't know this company was working on a COVID-19 test (despite the simplest of Google searches revealing this fact) and is "generously" offering the patent free for anyone working on COVID-19 tests.
Also, the patent is essentially "taking a sample and putting it into a machine that reads the sample." So basically every test ever made. When I give blood, they test my iron levels with a device that essentially violates this patent.
Assholes ... (Score:2)
... will be assholes.
Though, legally (IANAL), the summary builds a chain that they have a legitimate claim. If their legally acquired IP is being used without their consent, then yeah - they can be dicks and sue to stop the tests from being sold or distributed*. Barring some "national security" or "national emergency", they seem to be within their rights to do this.
It falls under one of your exemptions (Score:2)
Thing is, Trump has formally declared a national emergency over this.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/pre... [whitehouse.gov]
fuck them. Patents invalidated on the basis that they're trying to interfere with lifesaving efforts during a national emergency.
Is it valid? (Score:2)
Wasn't Theranos smoke and mirrors where they never had a real working product? In which case - is their patent valid?
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Is it valid? (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, but the whole patent system a money system where they get paid to approved patents and get paid to defend them. Nobody really care about invention at all. I even wonder if someone actually read them, I think the process is more like you put money and we grant you the fact that you put a document at some point in time, then the court will decide.
If this were true, ~90% of patent applications wouldn't be initially rejected, and ~50% of applications wouldn't be abandoned. [patentrebel.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Your evidence is assuming that political influence isn't a consideration. Or whether the patent examiner likes their name.
OTOH, past studies suggest that what the actually do is review previously accepted patents for something too similar. And if they don't find anything, perhaps because the words used to describe what's going on are different, then they accept the patent, and leave it up to the courts to decide. So until a patent is challenged in court it is presumed valid.
I'm sure things are more nuanc
Re: (Score:2)
>> Your evidence is assuming that political influence isn't a consideration. Or whether the patent examiner likes their name.
You'll need to cite modern day evidence for that.
I can understand that up to the 60's and maybe the 70's but not in the 80's onwards.
Disbarment? (Score:5, Insightful)
Because maybe it is time to set precedent..
Re:Disbarment? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: Disbarment? (Score:2)
The only way for a lawyer to get disbarred it to steal money from his own client without having prior court approval. They are supposed to share with the other lawyers, so it feels like someone is jumping the queue.
Re: (Score:2)
Not even that. My GF's lawyer stole pretty much EVERYTHING from her.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I think that is because of all the old people they use to have. it was a self preservation measure to increase
trust and business. The more they could fire and get rid of bad lawyers, the more they could bill and prove that
the ones working were the "good" lawyers.
Re: (Score:2)
Lawyers can be and have been disbarred for filing suits without intrinsic merit solely for the purpose of harrassment or extorting money; the technical term for this is "barratry." Unfortunately, getting a lawyer disbarred for barratry is usually quite difficult.
All patents by this company should be revoked (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Ignore patents (Score:2)
In times of crisis, just continue on and ignore the patent.
What are they going to do, arrest them?
Reserved for only the worst... (Score:5, Funny)
My father used to joke about what he would recommend for the worst of life's offenders. It's overly elaborate. Here goes.
Build a barn out of wood. Put a pedestal in the middle of the barn. On the pedestal, mount a vice. Insert important appendages from the offender in the vice and weld it shut. Give the offender a rusty butter knife.
Set the barn on fire.
I think everyone involved in this sordid attempt to extort money from potential death should be lined up in front of their own, individually reserved barns.
Re: (Score:3)
And burn a perfectly good barn?
Scaphism [wikipedia.org]. That's where it's at. And make sure to make it available on video.
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't need to be that good a barn. But a privy would be too small to give them enough time to worry about their decision.
That said, I don't approve of inflicting pain and suffering even on those who inflict that on others. Put them in a closed room and slowly fill the room with pure nitrogen.
Re: (Score:2)
There are cases where I approve. People trying to make a buck with the suffering of others is one of those.
Re: (Score:2)
In a crisis.. (Score:2)
In a crisis you really see what people are about. There are some pretty shitty people out there.
Re: (Score:3)
Only because the laws still for some odd reason make it illegal to remove them from the population.
Apparently they have backtracked their lawsuit (Score:5, Informative)
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/te... [telegraph.co.uk]
SoftBank-owned patent firm backtracks on lawsuit targeting coronavirus-test technology
A US biotech firm sued by a patents business revealed it was using its technology to develop tests for coronavirus
By Hasan Chowdhury and Laurence Dodds, US Technology Reporter, San Francisco 17 March 2020 12:28pm
A SoftBank-owned patent firm has back-pedalled on a lawsuit over medical testing licenses after it emerged the company it was suing was developing tests to detect coronavirus.
Labrador Diagnostics, a subsidiary of SoftBank-owned Fortress Investment Group, which was bought by the Japanese technology conglomerate for $3.3bn in 2017, attempted to sue a US biotech firm over the alleged infringement of patents.
BioFire, a Utah-based company, was accused of violating the rights to diagnostics technology held by Labrador, which is being represented by the law firm Irell and Manella.
The Fortress-subsidiary bought the rights to the patents from Theranos, the disgraced health-tech firm that shut its doors after its claims to revolutionise blood testing were found to be false.
Last week, BioFire launched three different tests for use on the frontline of the battle on coronavirus, which could help doctors speed up the diagnosis of respiratory conditions.
On Tuesday, Labrador said it would grant “royalty-free licenses to third parties” using its patented technology to tackle Covid-19, the novel strain of coronavirus.
It rejected claims that the lawsuit was attempting to stifle efforts to tackle coronavirus, and that its case was focused on “activities over the past six years that are not in any way related to Covid-19 testing”.
“Labrador fully supports efforts to assess and ultimately end this pandemic and hopes that more tests will be created, disseminated and used to quickly and effectively protect our communities through its offer of a royalty-free license during the current crisis,” the company said in a statement.
The lawsuit against BioFire came at a critical time, as scientists around the world race to develop a vaccine for Covid-19, which has infected almost 200,000 people globally.
Labrador claims it didn’t know BioFire was working on a Covid-19 treatment as the Utah firm revealed it was attempting to develop a treatment two days after the lawsuit was filed on March 11.
Re: (Score:3)
Royalty-free licensing?
Nice move... get people to accept you have something to license then after the crisis turn the screws.
Note they didn't say indefinite access royalty free.
Sneaky and amoral snakes.
Re: (Score:2)
Even so they'd better change their names and go into hiding if they expect to continue breathing. Motherfuckers.
There is an easy fix for that (Score:2)
Post the name and addresses of the trolls online.
Then wait a few hours or at most, days.
Here's how we need to proceed (Score:2)
Federal police power should be used to make sure that no judge issues any injunction affecting any current research, FDA filings, testing, or deployment of products relevant to this pandemic. After it's all over, we can then put together legislation to eliminate patent trolling altogether.
At a minimum, such legislation would automatically invalidate any patent that is not exploited in a reasonable amount of time by its owner. An exploitation requirement is right there in Art. I Sec. 8 of the Constitution: "
Hypocrites (Score:2)
Oh look, Greed before Compassion (Score:3)
I'm shocked, shocked I say, that a company puts profits before death. /s
Can we get a judge with a 'bout of common sense to throw these bullshit cases out -- because profiting off death is a dick move.
Indeed (Score:2)
Wonder what the reaction would have been had it been a CHINESE company stealing those patents?
Re: (Score:2)
It is perfectly legal for a foreign country to have laws that cover patents differently...including not recognizing them. The US used to do it all the time.
Test the lawyers first (Score:2)
Inject the lawyers with covid-19 and then make sure they are in the control group for the vaccine.
Openess (Score:2)
You want these scum bags to stop this silly shit?
Publish the story, ALONG WITH HOME, 2nd HOME ADDRESSES.
Pictures of the scum bags would help in the eradication effort.
Disbarment, pressure on bar association to act like humans, if that is possible.
What, exactly, should they expect? For society to give them money?
Really? I think that's GREAT NEWS! (Score:3)
who decided it was going to sue one of the companies making Covid-19 tests
Super! They've got a working patent. Specifically give those owners and lawyers the Covid-19 virus and let's see if their working procedures and system work successfully. If it does, THEY can start producing the kits and stop the other company. If not, well .... soon there won't be a problem to worry about.
NOTE: Covid-19 is NOT that bad -- it is NOT a death sentence just because you get it. But IF you've got a weak immune system there's a much higher chance or problems. If you draw the "short straw" here, without medical intervention (hospital, ICU, breathing machines) you'll really have problems and could possibly die. There are only SO many ICU bed and breathing machines at any one time; THAT'S why this is such a big deal. (Unless you like watching people die.)
Last I checked it was hard to share an blood re-oxygenator: "OK, Sally, you've had your turn breathing for an hour, now it's your brothers turn."
Re: (Score:3)
This is short summary from a today's article about Italy: The daily L'Eco di Bergamo used to have 2 pages of obituaries in past. Last Friday it had ten. In last 3 days there were additional 3000 people diagnosed with covid-19. Italy's death toll climbed to 2200. The funeral service sent a portable cooling box to a son of deceased father to keep the corpse in because the morgue is full. Doctors refused the perform the autopsy. Crematory service - running 24h/day - is overloaded and
Fortress also buying bitcoin claims from Mt Gox (Score:2)
If this is the same Fortress Investment Group, which I believe it is, then patent trolling is a comparatively benign line of business for them.
They are also the ones trying to buy the claims, at a huge discount to market*, of people who had bitcoin in Mt. Gox when it collapsed.
Anyone betting on that dumpster fire coming back to life is either insane or operating on assumptions that depend on corruption to succeed.
*a term with a remarkably flexible interpretation in kleptocurrency land
Punishment (Score:2)
As punishment, all the lawyers even remotely connected with this claim should be deliberately infected with COVID-19 and made to suffer it without any hospital treatment.
Re: (Score:2)
i see now they backpedaled but still ... (Score:2)
the article misinforms: it's not that they wanted to block the development of the test, they were just demanding their share from it in legal speak:
That Defendants be enjoined from infringing the Asserted Patents, or if their infringement is not enjoined, that Defendants be ordered to pay ongoing royalties to Labrador for any post-judgment infringement of the Asserted Patents;
this is how our beloved capitalism routinely works. the dramatic touch about the pandemic doesn't really change anything. i don't like it either, but there's nothing to see here. if you guys want to shut someone in a barn and set it on fire, at least make sure you get all the right guys and it makes a difference. :D
Re: (Score:2)
In another article, that I read, the patent was described as basically "take a sample, stick it in a machine, have the machine read the sample." No details as to what kind of sample or what the machine did. You might as well patent modes of transportation as "take people, put inside or on object, object takes them to destination." So it's not even "they had a valid claim and wanted their cut of any profits", but "they had an overly broad patent that would apply to any medical test and want to own a piece of
Drag them into the street and cut off their heads (Score:2)
Singularity Pepper decides (Score:2)
Update: Softbank backing off?? (Score:2)
The Telegraph is reporting Softbank has announced they have backed offf... (Paywall)
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/te... [telegraph.co.uk]
Theranos patents (Score:2)
Theranos never worked - lied on patent application (Score:2)
Someone patents a square tire. Square tires don't work. Lies to Patent Office that it does work, gets patent. Som
I want to read the judge's order, excoriating them (Score:2)
The judge's order on the motion for injunction should be entertaining to read. I presume the judge will find a way to write "hahaha get the fuck out of my court you piece of shit", but written in a way that doesn't set up grounds for appeal.
Re: (Score:3)
The judge's order on the motion for injunction should be entertaining to read. I presume the judge will find a way to write "hahaha get the fuck out of my court you piece of shit", but written in a way that doesn't set up grounds for appeal.
Since the Supreme Court's decision in eBay v. MercExchange, injunctions are almost entirely unavailable in patent suits. The sole exception would likely be two head-to-head competitors that both make directly competing products, such that if one infringes the other's patents, they're drastically affecting the market. For a patent troll with no products? Utterly impossible. They can still ask for it, since it's in the statute, but they're not going to get it.
And to be honest, they don't want an injunction.
Re: (Score:2)
Not to mention that such an injunction would fail the four factor test.
Re: (Score:2)
They probably don't even want royalties. Seems like most patent trolls just want to get paid to go away, and know full well that an actual court case is unlikely to go in their favor. But it could be dragged out long enough that even when their victims win, it's likely to cost them so much in time, attention, and money that an unjustified settlement payment is the cheaper option.
And of course, by using a shell company whose only assets are probably a mailbox and the patents themselves, the trolls are well
Interesting analysis (Score:2)
It's interesting you say that, given that the ruling said to apply the four-factor test, 7 of the 8 participating justices joined concurring opinions saying HOW to apply the four-factor test to patents, and 4 of the 8 joined in saying the test may well be satisfied by small inventors.
The case did say injunctions should not be automatic, and the four-factor test is what applies, not some other set of rules a court comes up with.
Specifically, if you or I invented something on our own time, most likely the bes
Re:Interesting analysis (Score:5, Interesting)
It's interesting you say that, given that the ruling said to apply the four-factor test, 7 of the 8 participating justices joined concurring opinions saying HOW to apply the four-factor test to patents, and 4 of the 8 joined in saying the test may well be satisfied by small inventors.
I never said size of the inventor was a consideration. The business activities of the inventor, however, are. To go through the factors, assuming the defendant is found to infringe the patent, then (i) they've suffered an irreparable injury; (ii) but monetary damages are adequate to compensate for that injury; (iii) the hardships are greater for the infringer if they're forced to stop making product, while them continuing and paying the plaintiff a royalty is actually good for the plaintiff; and (iv) public interest is served by not granting the injunction, particularly in this case.
It's interesting that I said that they're not going to get an injunction, and also entirely correct.
Specifically, if you or I invented something on our own time, most likely the best course of action (for us and for society) would be to license the invention to a company who can produce it in volume and widely distribute it - so that many people can use our cool new invention. At least half the court wrote that because that's the best way to make the invention available for use, using that approach should not bar an injunction.
The distinction there would be if you had licensed the invention to a company who was actively producing it. Then you'd have two competitors in the market - the infringer and the licensee - and an injunction against the infringer would make more sense. Here, there is no licensee or product producer, and an injunction would make the invention unavailable for use. That's why they're not going to get one.
Re: (Score:2)
What I found interesting wasn't so much your idea that THIS plaintiff won't get an injunction, but that you said after the ruling "injunctions are almost entirely unavailable in patent suits."
This particular plaintiff is a jackass, and the judge will likely treat them appropriately.
Re: (Score:2)
I am not a lawyer, but I do think about the seriousness of this. Patents
are one of the most important assets that have helped this country succeed.
Now I understand what a patent troll is. So why is it wrong to go out and buy
an asset, and exercise your rights under that patent. the job of an investor
is to make money. You invest in coders, designers and other things, so what's
so wrong about this.
The other issue is, The US government does have the right to intervene on
patents, if this is such an important pate
Re: (Score:2)
A bit part of the issue is that this sour of suit by non-practicing plaintiffs almost invariably involves poor quality patents that probably shouldn't have been granted in the first place and often a HUGE stretch to claim that the defendant's product actually infringes. They generally like to submarine their patents as well. That is, they keep as quiet as possible about them until someone falls into the trap. They then wait until the soon to be defendant is committed to production and profitable so they don
Re:Burn them (Score:4, Insightful)
Why? What better way to expose the absurdity of patent/copyright law? I say do whatever it takes to get the needed changes or abolish it entirely. No better time than now.
Re: (Score:3)
Softbank did not attempt any killings. (Score:2)
Where in TFS are you reading anything worse than literall murdering people with fire?
What's wrong with you?
Re: So you're worse than them? (Score:2)
Millions potentially
Re:So you're worse than them? (Score:5, Insightful)
The new testament was forgotten as soon as the Romans stopped feeding Christians to the lions. That hippy dippy love thy neighbour schtick is all well and good when you're oppressed, but when you're top dog, well... burn 'em.
did I just have a stroke? (Score:4, Insightful)
SoftBank-owned Patent Troll, Using Monkey Selfie Law Firm, Sues To Block Covid-19 Testing, Using Theranos Patents
WTF?!
Further proof we've crossed the singularity. You can not sensibly explain any event in 2020 to someone from the past.
As the Dalai L(l)ama said: (Score:2)
He likes your prophet. But his deciples are so unlike him.
(I'm healthy and hence not religious, by the way.)
Re: So you're worse than them? (Score:3, Funny)
Also, I thought Americans were Christians.
Above a certain IQ threshold, organized religion simply isn't a thing. However, there's nothing as inherently wise, spiritually-speaking, as loving 'thine enemy and turning the other cheek,' which is why I we should kiss these guys on both cheeks and light them on fire: "Send 'em off with kindness - and warmth."
Easy to explain: (Score:2)
Schizophrenia doesn't spare intelligent people.
Religion/schizophrenia (the psychologic kind, not the physiologocal one) is an illness, where people separate their model of reality from perceived reality, because reality is either too horrible to unite with the existing model of the world, or people are too dumb to do it. In that case, all you can do, is either willfully ignore the unreconcilable parts or delude yourself into an acceptable fantasy, and then either remove yourself from that unacceptable world
Re:So you're worse than them? (Score:5, Insightful)
Also, I thought Americans were Christians
Some are, sure. Most are Christian only when it's convenient, or suits their purpose.
Re:So you're worse than them? (Score:4, Interesting)
Also, all too many Christians worship Supply Side Jesus [imgur.com].
Re: (Score:2)
stop trolling poorly (Score:3)
Taken out of context, the New Testament can be used to justify anything, leading to your kind of ridiculous [youtube.com].
Admonishing a crowd for nearly stoning a woman accused of adultery (John 8:7) is one thing. Jesus himself would not have interfered with the execution of a rapist or murderer. If a patent troll jeopardizes the health and safety of the public for personal financial gain, how are they any different from a rapist or murderer?
Overly simplistic and dogmatic execution of any law leads to a Catch-22, thus
This is why arguing online is a problem. (Score:2)
Every uneducated idiot, passive-thinking trigger machine and child, that doesn't know the first thingy and is hopelessly overwhelmed by the mentally mature arguments that go way over his head, gets to "moderate" you (-1, Troll).
--.--
Why do we even bother with these troglodytes?
Re: (Score:2)
Also, I thought Americans were Christians...
What the fuck? No, no, and NO.
We're whatever we want to be. Freedom OF religion and freedom FROM religion. And most Americans aren't religious, despite what they may claim. Not even close.
Re:So you're worse than them? (Score:4, Informative)
"Do you also believe in locking up police officers for detaining criminals? "
If they detain citizens for being 'suspicious' without a clearly reasonable articulable crime they have committed or are in the middle of committing, sure!
That's how the law works, they lose their immunity if they break the law.
This is not a hunch business.
Re:So you're worse than them? (Score:5, Informative)
""Reasonable suspicion" is actually all that officers need to detain someone. "
"Reasonable suspicion of a crime"
Reasonable suspicion is a legal standard of proof in United States law that is less than probable cause, the legal standard for arrests and warrants, but more than an "inchoate and unparticularized suspicion or 'hunch'";[1] it must be based on "specific and articulable facts", "taken together with rational inferences from those facts",[2] and the suspicion must be associated with the specific individual.[3] If police additionally have reasonable suspicion that a person so detained is armed and dangerous, they may "frisk" the person for weapons, but not for contraband like drugs. However, if the police develop probable cause during a weapons frisk (by feeling something that could be a weapon or contraband, for example), they can then search you. Reasonable suspicion is evaluated using the "reasonable person" or "reasonable officer" standard,[4] in which said person in the same circumstances could reasonably suspect a person has been, is, or is about to be engaged in criminal activity; it depends upon the totality of circumstances, and can result from a combination of particular facts, even if each is individually innocuous.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm grabbing my torch and pitchfork. Let's go!
The torch I OK with, but please PLEASE do not use other implement and breach containment!!! ^_^
Re: (Score:3)
Just go to their office and start coughing (Score:2)
If we get a thousand people to cough then it's likely the odds are against them.
Re: (Score:3)
Here is a clue for you, there are no deaths of people under 50 from this virus. Almost none under 65. You are fearing something that cannot hurt you or them.
Ummm, not quite. There were several young healthcare workers who died in China [businessinsider.com]. I am setting the conspiracy theories aside. The risk is low, but not zero.
Hire a Ginosaji (Score:2)
Preferably slow and painful.
I have an idea for that [youtu.be]...
Re: (Score:2)
Agree, they deserve actual death. Preferably slow and painful.
I would donate to a KickStarter campaign for this, if there was one.
Re: (Score:2)
Always interesting how quickly we jump to "they're inhuman, kill them.". Strangely, that's the first step towards killing any group of people. Just label them inhuman, makes the murder easier psychologically.
Humans have always puzzled me. We have the most developed brains but we've figured out how to not use it as often as possible.
Re: (Score:2)
Hey it got results back in the old days. With many of these patent trolls it would be much cheaper to simply have them killed versus a multi year court battle.
Re: (Score:2)
True. That however doesn't weaken the argument that they ought to be lynched.
Re: (Score:2)
Only with our collective consent.
The people can decide to kill human obstacles. China dealt with those who poisoned infant formula by public execution. They weren't so high and mighty walking out to be shot. (The videos are an amusing watch.)