Amazon sued over Kindle SO screensavers

[RainingLemur]

http://paidcontent.org/article/419-a...-screensavers/

NPS claims the Kindle devices infringe US Patent 5,748,190 because they are “personal computers that show Sponsored Screensavers .. at predetermined times of inactivity.”

&

Acacia is seeking damages and the destruction of all Kindles that have the infringing screen saver.

To the second part - From my cold, dead hands.

[tubemonkey]

As long as I get my money back, they can destroy my KSO

[RDaneel54]

Originally Posted by RainingLemur

http://paidcontent.org/article/419-a...-screensavers/



To the second part - From my cold, dead hands.

I'm right with you on this one.

This whole patent troll thing is a new one on me. I'd have to put them on my "Don't Like" list.

[junkml]

I think this is utter crap. But if it did come down to it, all Amazon would have to do would be push an update and the special offer kindles wouldn't exist anymore.

[CWatkinsNash]

Originally Posted by junkml

I think this is utter crap. But if it did come down to it, all Amazon would have to do would be push an update and the special offer kindles wouldn't exist anymore.

Exactly. My new K3 that Amazon sent to replace the cracked one was originally a KSO that they flashed with the regular firmware. (The box it came in, with matching serial number, was for KSO.)

Patent trolls sicken me.

[Giggleton]

Originally Posted by RDaneel54

I'm right with you on this one.

This whole patent troll thing is a new one on me. I'd have to put them on my "Don't Like" list.

patent trolls are just like copyright holders yes?

[JD Gumby]

Originally Posted by Giggleton

patent trolls are just like copyright holders yes?

No. They buy up patents and use litigation as their primary revenue stream (or the threat of litigation to bully companies into extortionate licensing terms), rather than creating any products of their own.

[JoHunt]

So my Kindle is a personal computer? Maybe I should re-read the manual

[Giggleton]

Originally Posted by JD Gumby

No. They buy up patents and use litigation as their primary revenue stream (or the threat of litigation to bully companies into extortionate licensing terms), rather than creating any products of their own.

I see, but I suppose they are similar in that they can both stop people from creating?

[carpetmojo]

Originally Posted by Giggleton

I see, but I suppose they are similar in that they can both stop people from creating?

You mean Amazon stops people creating ?

Well, it is a point of view.........

[Lemurion]

Originally Posted by Giggleton

patent trolls are just like copyright holders yes?

No, patent trolls are more like extortionists than anything else.

[emellaich]

Originally Posted by Giggleton

I see, but I suppose they are similar in that they can both stop people from creating?

No, they aren't the same. Let me expand on JD Gumby's explanation.

The patent troll lifecycle typically begins with a startup business that has an idea, gets a patent, and gets funding to grow the business. Typical of most startup businesses, the company fails. With a bankrupt company, all of the assets are on sale for whatever they will bring. This includes office furniture and patents.

Some companies specialize in buying up patents from failed companies. Then they sue other companies to make money on the purchased patent.

I haven't read the original article and I don't know it this is specifically a case of patent trolls at work, but they are generally disliked because they don't create ideas, and they never intend to produce the item.

In the typical case, copyright is owned by the author who created the work or by the publisher who edited/produced/marketed the work. Without these copyright owners, the work wouldn't exist and that is not true of patent trolls.

[Joykins]

Originally Posted by junkml

I think this is utter crap. But if it did come down to it, all Amazon would have to do would be push an update and the special offer kindles wouldn't exist anymore.

Actually, I'm pretty sure that *I* could hit that button now and have a regular kindle. I just don't feel like paying Amazon $30 to do so at this point.

[teh603]

Originally Posted by emellaich

The patent troll lifecycle typically begins with a startup business that has an idea, gets a patent

Some companies specialize in buying up patents from failed companies. Then they sue other companies to make money on the purchased patent.

Not quite true. From what I've seen, most patent trolls actually go looking for "prior art" stuff like a basic concept of technology that they can patent. Once they've secured the patent, they start litigating. They only buy patents if they can get them really really cheap. Like in this case.

Either way, its just a sign that we need to rethink our use and abuse of IP law. A "use it or lose it" clause would go a long way towards stopping this, by forcing would-be trolls to actually make a product instead of just trying to keep them off the market.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by JD Gumby

No. They buy up patents and use litigation as their primary revenue stream (or the threat of litigation to bully companies into extortionate licensing terms), rather than creating any products of their own.

Or actually inventing anything.
A troll company has no engineers, coders, or any productive staff; just lawyers and bankers.