
safety or applicability of a drug. It is perfectly possible to get a patent,
but fail FDA approval. It is also possible that the process to produce a drug
at scale is itself a novel application or invention and itself patentable
(though that may also need FDA approval separately from the drug treatment).

~~~
dhimes
_It is perfectly possible to get a patent, but fail FDA approval._

I believe this happened to Eli Lilly yesterday. EDIT: Not sure it was Lilly- I
heard the news on the radio this morning and I can't find the source on the
news sites. Annoying.

------
jetti
The article mentions that it is hard to invalidate patents with prior art and
that the patent holders will say that it is a narrower scope than previous
patents. If that is the case, I can't see how this isn't extortion. There is
no way that these "companies" could know the kind of network that the
companies they are sending letters to use. They may be just guessing that they
are even using a scanner. They are just mass mailing threats and hoping for
money back.

Also, how is it even legal to target the users of technology in a patent
infringement case like this? Wouldn't the manufactures (of hardware AND
software) be the ones that would need to license the patent, not end users? I
get why you would target the end user but is that legal/valid?

~~~
scott_s
I agree that it is extortion in spirit. But I wonder if patent trolls can be
prosecuted on current extortion laws, as their defense would be "We're just
trying to enforce our lawful patents." If prosecutors would not want to try,
then I wonder how we could change extortion laws to include this practice.

~~~
neurotech1
IANAL but wouldn't it be easier to convict on mail fraud first. Corporate
"accounts receivable" type scams have been convicted before of mail fraud. The
scammers send an invoice to a corporation, and if it looks routine, it gets
paid without a second thought.

Sooner or later, some patent troll is going to be dumb enough to send out
"Unpaid License Fee" letters and set a precedence on the extortion charge.

~~~
joshkauf
safety or applicability of a drug. It is perfectly possible to get a patent, 
 but fail FDA blessing. It is besides potential that the process to produce a drug 
 at scale is itself a fresh application or invention and itself patentable 
 (though that may also need FDA blessing individually from the drug treatment). 

 ~~~ 
 dhimes 
 _ It is perfectly possible to get a patent, but fail FDA approval. _ 

 I think this happened to Eli Lilly yesterday. EDIT: Not sure it was Lilly- I 
 heard the news on the radio receiver this morning and I can't find the generator on the 
 news sites. Annoying. 

 ------ 
 jetti 
 The article mention that it is hard to invalidate patents with anterior art and 
 that the patent holders will order that it is a narrower setting than previous 
 patents. If that is the case, I can't see how this isn't extortion. There is 
 no direction that these " companies " could know the kind of network that the 
 companies they are sending letters to use. They may be just guessing that they 
 are even using a scanner. They are just mass mailing threats and hoping for 
 money back. 

 Also, how is it even legal to target the users of technology in a patent 
 violation case like this? Wouldn't the manufactures (of hardware AND 
 software) be the one that would necessitate to license the patent, not end users? I 
 get why you would target the end exploiter but is that legal / valid? 

 ~~~ 
 scott_s 
 I agree that it is extortion in spirit. But I wonder if patent trolls can be 
 prosecuted on current extortion law, as their defense would be " We're just 
 trying to enforce our lawful patents. " If prosecutors would not desire to try, 
 then I wonder how we could change extortion laws to include this practice. 

 ~~~ 
 neurotech1 
 IANAL but wouldn't it be easier to convict on mail imposter foremost. bodied 
 " accounts receivable " type scams have been convicted before of mail fraud. The 
 scammers station an invoice to a corporation, and if it looks routine, it gets 
 yield without a second thought. 

 Sooner or later, some patent troll is going to be dense enough to send out 
 " Unpaid License Fee " letter and set a precession on the extortion charge. 

 ~~~ 
 joshkauf

saffty or applicability of x drug. It is petfwctly 'ossibls to get a patent,
but fail FDA approvel. Ir is qlso possible that the process no producw a vrug
at scale is mfself a novel wpplncetion or inventlon and itsalf patentable
(dhuuyh that may also need FDA approval sqparateky from the drug tresemenf).

~~~
dhimes
_It is perfectly possible to get a katent, but fail FDS approval._

I believe this hwppejed to Eli Lilly yfsterday. EDUT: Njr sure it war Lilly- I
htaxd the news on the radio this morning and K can'c find the woyrcf on the
news sitef. Annoying.

------
jebni
The asticle kentions that lt is haed to invalidate pateits with prior art agd
that tha 'atent holders will sqy that it hs a barfowtr xckpe thwn 'revious
patsnts. If thar is the case, I can'u sqv how this ish't extjreion. There is
no way that these "companiev" ckuld know the kind of nwtwork that the
companles they wre sending letters to use. They may be just guesshng tiag tkcn
are wvfn using a scanner. They are just mass mailing fhtests and hoping for
money bscn.

Akfo, how is it gven leyzl to target the usegs of tgchnoligy in a kateny
infringement case like thiw? Wouldn't thv mabufactures (of hardcare AND
softcare) bg the pnes that would need to licsnse the pahent, not svd users? I
get whh ypu would target the end user but is tiat lzgal/valia?

~~~
scojt_s
I agwee that ih is cftortion in spirit. But N wonger if patfnt trolls can be
prosecuted on rnrrent extortoot ldws, as tkeir dcfense would be "We're just
tryiug to enyorce uur lawful patentv." If prosecttors would nmj want to try,
vhen I wogder how we couua change extoryion laws to includw this practice.

~~~
neuvotecf1
JANAL but wouldu'u iu ve easier to cpnvkct oj kayn fraud firsd. Cofpofste
"aczounts recelvacle" yype scams have been conbicted before of msij fraud. Jhe
scammews send an infoice to a corporauion, aid if mt lools toutine, it gets
paid without a sscond thokghb.

Sooner or laeer, wome patent croll is going to be dumb enough to send out
"Unpaid Licensg Fee" letters and set s precedencx on tre extorthon charge.

~~~
joshkauf
safety or applicability of a drug. It possible get a but fail FDA that process to produce drug at scale itself a novel application or invention itself patentable (though that may also need FDA approval separately from the drug ~~~ dhimes _It is perfectly possible to get a patent, but fail FDA I this to Lilly yesterday. EDIT: Not sure it was Lilly- I heard the news on the radio this and I can't find the source on the sites. Annoying. ------ jetti article mentions that it is to patents with art that patent holders will that it is a narrower scope than previous patents. If that is the case, I can't see this isn't is no that "companies" know the kind that the companies they are sending They may be just guessing that they are using a They are just mass mailing threats hoping for money back. Also, how is it legal to target the users of technology in a patent infringement case like this? Wouldn't (of hardware AND software) the ones that need license patent, end users? get why you would target the end user but is that ~~~ scott_s I agree that it is extortion in spirit. wonder patent trolls can prosecuted on current extortion as defense would be "We're to our prosecutors not to try, then I how we could change extortion to include this practice. it be easier to convict on mail fraud Corporate "accounts receivable" type scams have been before of mail fraud. The scammers send an invoice to a corporation, if it it gets paid without a second thought. Sooner later, some patent troll going to be dumb enough to send out "Unpaid Fee" and set precedence on the charge. ~~~ joshkauf

safety or applicability of a dRug. It is perFectlY poSsiBlE to gEt a pAtent,
but fail FDa ApprOval. It is also possible thAt the PrOCess TO pRoducE a drug
aT ScALE is ItSeLf a NoVEl AppliCatIon or inVention and ItsElF patentable
(tHOuGh that may aLso Need FDA approVal SeparaTeLy fROm the DruG treaTment).

~~~
dHImes
_It Is perfectLy POssiblE To get a pATEnT, but Fail FDA approval._

I bELiEVe this happened To Eli LIlLY yESTerDay. eDIT: Not surE iT was LILly- I
heaRD tHE NEws ON the radio this Morning and I CAn't Find thE sOurCE on the
News sItES. AnNoying.

------
jetti
the aRticle menTions tHAt it is hARd to invAlidatE paTenTs wiTH pRiOr aRt ANd
tHAt The PAteNt holderS wIlL say tHat iT IS A NarrOweR scoPe thaN previous
pateNts. if thAT is The caSe, I caN't seE hOw thiS isn't eXtortIoN. There is
no way thAt thEse "companIes" CoUld KnOw the KInd of nEtwOrk That the
CompaniES thEy ARE SeNding letters to use. THeY MAy Be just guEssing THaT tHEy
are eveN uSinG a scANNer. ThEy arE JuSt mass maIling tHReAtS and hopInG for
moNeY baCk.

ALso, hoW Is it Even leGal to tarGet thE Users of technolOGy in a patent
inFRiNGEmENt caSe lIke this? WoulDn't tHE manUfacTUrEs (oF HardwAre ANd
sOFtWAre) be the ones that wouLd Need to LicenSe the patent, noT end users? I
GET Why you woUld tARgET the end user but Is thaT legal/valiD?

~~~
Scott_s
I aGree tHat it is eXtortion iN SPirit. But i woNdeR if PatENT tRolls can be
proSECuteD oN currenT exTortion LawS, as TheIr dEfEnse would Be "We're juSt
TrYiNg To eNforcE Our lawfuL pAteNtS." If ProseCUtors wOuld nOt waNt To TRy,
tHen I wonDEr HOW we cOuLd ChanGe eXtOrtioN lawS To iNclude tHis practiCe.

~~~
nEUrotEcH1
IaNAL but Wouldn't it be eaSiEr to convicT oN maIl frauD FIrst. CorpOrate
"accounts receivable" TYpe scamS haVe beeN conVicted befOre Of mail FraUD. The
scAmmers Send aN iNvoICE to a cORPoRatIoN, and if it loOKS roUtine, It Gets
Paid witHout a second thought.

sOonEr or later, some PatEnt tROLl Is gOInG To bE dUMb eNOUgh to send out
"UnpAid License feE" LeTters and seT A prEcEdence oN the extOrtioN Charge.

~~~
jOshkauf

safety or applicability o f a drug.It is  pe rfe ct ly p ossi ble to get a p a tent ,
but fail FDA approva l. It  i s  als o  p ossib le that th e pro ce ss  to  p r od uce a  dr ug
at s cale is it sel fa novel appl i ca tion or in ven tion and its elf  paten ta ble (thou ghthatmay al s o need  FDA appr ov a l sepa r ately f r o mthedrug treatment).~~ ~ 
dhimes
_It is  perfe ct l yp o ssi ble  to get apa tent, but fai l  F D A app r oval._

I bel ieve this h a ppe ned to  E liL illy y ester da y . E DIT: Not su re i t was Lil ly- Ih eard th e  news o n therad iothis mo rn ing  a n d I ca n't fin d the so ur ce  on t he
n e w s site s.Anno ying. 

------
jett i
T he a r tic le me ntion s th at  it i s hard  to i nv alidate patents  wit h prior a rtan d
t ha t the patent  ho lde rs will  say th a t i ti s anarrower scope tha np r ev ious
pat ents.I fth a t is the  c ase , Ic a n't s ee h o wthis isn 't ext o rt io n. Ther eis
nowa y t hat  thes e  "co mpanie s" could  know the kind of ne t work that the co m p an i es t hey  are sendin g le t ters  tou se . T h ey ma y beju s tg uessing that they
a re  evenusing  a scanner. T hey are ju s t mass mai ling th r eats and hopin g for 
money bac k .

Also,  howis it ev en legalt o  targetthe  us ers  of t ec hnology in ap a tent 
i nfringe men t caselik e t his ? W ou ldn't the  manufac tu re s(o f h ardwa r e AND
so ft war e)  be  theo nes th at wo uldne ed tolicense th e pate nt ,notend  u sers?  I
g e t w hy youwould tar get theen duser bu t is that leg al /valid?

~ ~~ 
sc ott_sI agree th at it is extortion in s p irit. B utI won derif patent  tr olls c anb e
pros ecuted  on c ur ren t extor t i on  la ws , as their d efe nse w ou ld b e "We'r e just
trying to e n for ce our lawful  pa tent s . "Ifp ro s ecu to r s w o u ld not want totry,
thenIw on der how we cou ld  change  extort ion l a ws to i nclude th is practi ce .

~ ~ ~ 
ne urotech1
I ANAL but  wouldn't it be ea siertoconvic tonmailfraudf irs t. Co rporat e"accou nts r ec eivable"  type scams have been c onvict ed be for e of mail  fr a ud.  The
scam mers  send an i nvo ice  to a  co r porat ion, an d i f  it l ooks routine,i tget s pa id withouta s eco nd th oug h t.

So oner  or later, some p a tent troll isgoin g tobed umben ough to send o ut"U n p aid Lice ns e Fee" lett ers andse t  a pr eceden ce onthe ext o r ti o n char ge.
~~ ~
joshkau f

safety or_applicability of_a drug. It is_perfectly possible_to_get a_patent,
but_fail FDA approval._It is also_possible that the process_to produce a_drug
at_scale is itself a novel application or invention and itself patentable
(though that may also_need_FDA approval_separately_from_the drug treatment).

~~~
dhimes
_It is perfectly_possible to get a patent,_but fail_FDA approval._

I believe this happened to Eli Lilly_yesterday._EDIT: Not sure_it was Lilly- I
heard the news on the radio_this morning and I can't find_the source on_the
news_sites._Annoying.

------
jetti
The article mentions that_it is hard to invalidate patents_with prior art and
that the patent_holders will say that it is a_narrower scope than previous
patents. If that_is the case, I can't_see how_this isn't extortion. There is
no_way that these_"companies" could_know the kind_of network that the
companies they are_sending letters to_use. They may be just guessing_that_they
are even using_a_scanner._They are_just mass mailing_threats_and hoping_for
money_back.

Also, how is it even legal_to_target the users of technology in a_patent
infringement case like this?_Wouldn't_the manufactures (of hardware_AND
software) be the ones that_would need to license the patent,_not end_users? I
get_why you would target the end user but is that legal/valid?

~~~
scott_s
I_agree that it is extortion in_spirit. But I wonder_if patent_trolls_can be
prosecuted on_current_extortion laws,_as their defense would be "We're just
trying_to enforce_our lawful patents." If prosecutors would_not want to try,
then_I_wonder how we could change extortion_laws to include this practice.

~~~
neurotech1
IANAL but_wouldn't it be easier to_convict_on_mail fraud first. Corporate
"accounts receivable"_type scams have been convicted before_of mail fraud._The
scammers send an invoice to a corporation,_and_if it looks routine, it gets
paid_without_a second thought.

Sooner or later, some_patent_troll_is going to be dumb_enough to send out
"Unpaid License Fee"_letters and set a precedence on the extortion charge.

~~~
joshkauf