The War On Infringement
“If everybody is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking.” - General Patton
General Patent Corporation International (GPCI), a leading patent licensing and enforcement firm headquartered in Suffern, NY, according to its press release, reached an important milestone in its patent enforcement campaign on behalf of its subsidiary, Acticon Technologies LLC (Acticon). GPCI recently obtained the 150th settlement under Acticon's portfolio of "smart connector" patents.
"I am absolutely amazed at the success of these patents," said Steven Farago, Ph.D., the inventor of the Acticon "smart connector" technology. "Back in 1996, I wouldn't have thought it was possible to license 150 companies. But General Patent has been wonderful and exceeded all my expectations. They have left no stone unturned in enforcing the Acticon patents."
In another press release marking its 20th year in assertive licensing, General Patent claims to have netted millions of dollars for inventors, championing the causes of independent inventors in their “David vs. Goliath” battles.
Is there a right way and a wrong way for an inventor to go about licensing a patent to a major corporation? Mike Dillon, General Counsel at Sun Microsystems, who says "the best offense...is a good defense", seems to suggest as much here on his blog:
When a third party claim has been clear and the terms reasonable, we have entered into licenses. However, those situations are easily distinguished from the cases that make up almost all of our present docket of patent litigation. These lawsuits have usually been filed with no advance notice, by plaintiffs that don't commercialize their patents (i.e. create and sell products) and in venues considered favorable to them. It's also almost always the case that these plaintiffs have done little or no investigation to ascertain whether our products infringe prior to filing their lawsuit.
Comments ensue. What do you think? Is every non-practicing entity (NPE) that asserts patent rights, with a view toward settling a license, a dreaded patent troll? Or is there a legitimate role for patent management companies to provide professional assertive licensing services to patent holders? And, anyway, is patent litigation the best approach to intellectual property dispute resolution?
