Article: patent troll sues photographer for infringement on patent for workflow

I look forward to a day where we reform our patent system... hopefully some of these trolls can be shut down.

I find it strangely odd, that photographers who would be hell-bent on enforcing their rights to their own intellectual property, would find issue with others who seek to do the same.

joeseph wrote in post #17187452
I find it strangely odd, that photographers who would be hell-bent on enforcing their rights to their own intellectual property, would find issue with others who seek to do the same.

There's a huge difference. Someone has to knowingly download a photograph and reuse it in some way to be infringing on a photographer.

In the case of these patents you could easily figure out for yourself how to shoot a marathon, post the photos online and offer them for sale - all without any knowledge whatsoever of these patents (it's not rocket science anymore) - and then you get a letter from an attorney demanding payment to PhotoCrazy.

groundloop wrote in post #17187571
In the case of these patents you could easily figure out for yourself how to shoot a marathon, post the photos online and offer them for sale - all without any knowledge whatsoever of these patents (it's not rocket science anymore) - and then you get a letter from an attorney demanding payment to PhotoCrazy.

That's how patents, trademarks, and copyrights work. Just because someone else came up with the idea at a later date does not invalidate the patent, trademark, or copyright. Instead of griping, come up with an alternative process flow, patent it, and you too can be on the gravy train.

gjl711 wrote in post #17187576
That's how patents, trademarks, and copyrights work. Just because someone else came up with the idea at a later date does not invalidate the patent, trademark, or copyright. Instead of griping, come up with an alternative process flow, patent it, and you too can be on the gravy train.

OR.... you get a patent on a process, and then try to collect royalties from anyone who uses anything remotely close to what's in your patent, whether it's actually infringing or not. Most people will realize that it costs more to fight this than to simply pay up, so you're on the gravy train.

As a patent or trademark owner you must defend your patent or risk loosing control. I too find many of the posts here surprising. As Joseph commented, as a community where we are so protective of our work, why the hostility towards someone doing the same? For the business this is more surprising. Just adjust the cost of your product accordingly or come up with a different process. Why waste time fighting this. It seems so unproductive.

I just patented the exact manner in which I conduct my morning constitution. Anyone caught doing the same is infringing and will be sued.

gjl711 wrote in post #17187632
As a patent or trademark owner you must defend your patent or risk loosing control. I too find many of the posts here surprising. As Joseph commented, as a community where we are so protective of our work, why the hostility towards someone doing the same? For the business this is more surprising. Just adjust the cost of your product accordingly or come up with a different process. Why waste time fighting this. It seems so unproductive.

Because the patent isn't for a novel or innovative idea. He isn't protecting 'his work', he did 'his work', filled out some paperwork, and now wants a slice of every else's pie when they do their own work and also come up with the same stupidly obvious idea in a digital market place.

Luckless wrote in post #17187667
Because the patent isn't for a novel or innovative idea. He isn't protecting 'his work', he did 'his work', filled out some paperwork, and now wants a slice of every else's pie when they do their own work and also come up with the same stupidly obvious idea in a digital market place.

Show the prior work, case over.

gjl711 wrote in post #17187673
Show the prior work, case over.

I don't need to show valid work. This is the kind of thing that should NEVER have been granted a patent in the first place. Your argument is akin to saying "Show prior examples" when calling for women's rights and social change.

Granting patents for things this stupidly simply and obvious are exceptionally harmful to development of digital technologies. We are allowing a minefield to be planted and are now at risk of the only players who are able to navigate it safely and survive economocially are the larger and established companies, which is the exact OPPOSITE of what patents are intended for.

Using patents as a comparison with trademarks because they are both intellectual property is akin to comparing bats and giraffes because they are both mammals.

.

jecottrell wrote in post #17187744
Using patents as a comparison with trademarks because they are both intellectual property is akin to comparing bats and giraffes because they are both mammals.
.

That's a good example, bats and giraffes are very different but at the core they are very alike. Bottom line, like it or not the patent holder did nothing wrong and followed the accepted process, was granted the patent and is now defending it. So why the whining?

gjl711 wrote in post #17187821
That's a good example, bats and giraffes are very different but at the core they are very alike. Bottom line, like it or not the patent holder did nothing wrong and followed the accepted process, was granted the patent and is now defending it. So why the whining?

Because the "accepted process" isn't widely accepted when it is misused.

The "accepted process" is broken, and none of us are in a position to change it.

gjl711 wrote in post #17187821
That's a good example, bats and giraffes are very different but at the core they are very alike. Bottom line, like it or not the patent holder did nothing wrong and followed the accepted process, was granted the patent and is now defending it. So why the whining?

And slave owners "did nothing wrong" when slavery was legal.

Just because something is legal under the current laws does not mean it is right or should be done.

Wow.. comparing patents to slavery.. yikes. So what exactly are you advocating for? Abolishment of all patents or only stupid ones. And if only the stupid ones, who decides? Can anyone come forth and say, dang.. that's a stupid patent, abolish it or can we just choose to ignore ones we consider stupid. That's silly. We have a process. If you don't like the patent, fight it.