Multiple lawsuits for declaratory judgment against Lodsys have been filed by Foresee, ESET, OpinionLab, and The New York Times.
I previously discussed a strategy to kill a patent troll. While what is happening is not my actual strategy being implemented, I believe this is an important development that might encourage more companies threatened by Lodsys to file declaratory judgment actions. Hopefully facing many DJ actions will deter future patent trolls from such aggressive tactics like Lodsys is using, thought I think ultimately we need some reform concerning what is required to file an infringement suit.
I would still like to see many, many more DJ actions filed in many other jurisdictions. I hope Lodsys sees its legal bills skyrocket. Though, Lodsys's response so far has been like a wounded animal, lashing out at everything that moves... before it eventually dies off, hopefully. (In the corporate sense only, I do NOT wish literal death on any person, for the most part.)
Here's to hoping more companies pile onto the DJ actions! I also would love to see the invalidity arguments... oh the anticipation of a good legal smackdown... (legal geek at heart) I hope that the DJ suits are not settled before disclosing the invalidity arguments.
Definition - "Patent Troll"
"PATENT TROLL" - Any party that intentionally misconstrues the claims of their patent to assert it against another. A patent troll does not have to be a non-practicing entity (NPE) or in any particular industry, all that is required is an intentional misconstruing of the claims in an attempt to extort money from another.
Disclaimer - All information and postings in this blog are provided for educational purposes only. Nothing in this blog constitutes legal advice and you should not rely on any information herein as such. If you do not have a signed engagement agreement with me, then you are not represented by me and you should retain your own attorney for any legal issues you are having.