Skip to main content
Ask Patents

Return to Question

grammar
Source Link
john
john
  • 410
  • 2
  • 11

Where is the line telling that a litigation is basically a bullying tool for a patent holder? Accusing party is providing software patent infringement arguments that are laughable to one skilled in art but soundssound legit to a lawyer. A simple example is infringement chart construction by accusing party including blunt terminology misinterpretation - obviously a work of a lawyer or a council not someone skilled in art. The position of accusing party is filled with examples like this. Is there a way of showing the case is a fraud?

Where is the line telling that a litigation is basically a bullying tool for a patent holder? Accusing party is providing software patent infringement arguments that are laughable to one skilled in art but sounds legit to a lawyer. A simple example is infringement chart construction by accusing party including blunt terminology misinterpretation - obviously a work of a lawyer or a council not someone skilled in art. The position of accusing party is filled with examples like this. Is there a way of showing the case is a fraud?

Where is the line telling that a litigation is basically a bullying tool for a patent holder? Accusing party is providing software patent infringement arguments that are laughable to one skilled in art but sound legit to a lawyer. A simple example is infringement chart construction by accusing party including blunt terminology misinterpretation - obviously a work of a lawyer or a council not someone skilled in art. The position of accusing party is filled with examples like this. Is there a way of showing the case is a fraud?

Question mark added to the question title.
Link
edit approved Oct 30, 2014 at 11:29
alex
edit approved Oct 30, 2014 at 11:29
alex
  • 360
  • 1
  • 14

When a patent infringment litigation is considered frivolous?

Source Link
john
john
  • 410
  • 2
  • 11

When a patent infringment litigation is considered frivolous

Where is the line telling that a litigation is basically a bullying tool for a patent holder? Accusing party is providing software patent infringement arguments that are laughable to one skilled in art but sounds legit to a lawyer. A simple example is infringement chart construction by accusing party including blunt terminology misinterpretation - obviously a work of a lawyer or a council not someone skilled in art. The position of accusing party is filled with examples like this. Is there a way of showing the case is a fraud?