Quote:
Originally Posted by elcreative
And there is a simple legal fact... if you don't defend it then at some point it is deemed to be undefended and back in the public domain... otherwise known as use it or lose it...
|
Are you sure you're not mixing patent and trademark law up? Trademarks (afaik) have to be defended in order to retain, patents I'm not so sure about.
People have sat on patents for 10-15 years until a sufficient market has built up to allow them to then sell the patent to a company that has no intention of building any products, just suing everyone they can.
I don't think Apple is been more aggressive just to test the validity of their patents. If they are more aggressive, there's likely more to it.
Usually it's the untested nature of patents that is what keeps most companies posturing rather than filing lawsuits. They'd rather use the threat of legal action to ensure other companies license the patent than aggressively peruse everyone (the reason why when legal action does occur, settlements are often sought early by both parties, cost obviously also been an issue) A dodgy patent can be just as profitable as a valid one so long as you only posture/settle and don't actually push for a legal decision.
It's also why companies are buying up batches of patents they don't plan to use and pooling with other companies. It helps prevent another company suing them over a patent as they risk been sued over multiple patents in return. Of course what it doesn't protect against is the trolling companies who have no products, so do not fear others patents.
Been aggressive can result in your patents becoming worthless. As happened to multiple Apple patents against Samsung.