Dit een versie van http://trolltracker.blogspot.com/2007/10/patent-troll-sues-fish-richardson.html zoals onze crawler deze aantrof bij het doorzoeken van de site op 21/12/2007. De onderstaande pagina is de versie in onze index, die is gebruikt om de pagina een plaats te geven tussen de resultaten van je recente zoekactie. Dit hoeft niet de nieuwste versie van de pagina te zijn. Als je de nieuwste versie wilt bekijken, ga je naar de pagina op het web.
Live.com sluit zich niet aan bij de inhoud van of degenen die verantwoordelijk zijn voor de hieronder weergegeven pagina.

Tuesday, October 9, 2007

Patent Troll Sues Fish & Richardson

Illinois Computer Research, the shell entity that Scott C. Harris sold his patents to, that then sued Google after Harris had previously sued Dell, has amended its complaint to assert tortious interference claims against Harris's former law firm, Fish & Richardson. Niro Scavone did the honors here. According to the amended complaint, which you can view here (hopefully - it's my first time trying to upload a PDF),

-- Harris has been inventing since age 12
-- Fish was aware that he was licensing his 27 patents
-- Other clients before Google complained about Harris
-- Fish & Richardson investigated when Dell complained, and told Harris to sell his patents
-- Harris did sell his patents - to Illinois Computer Research
-- On August 29, ICR sent a threat letter to Google.
-- On September 12 (two days after ICR sued Google and the very day I posted my original post -- update here), Fish & Richardson demanded that Scott Harris resign within 24 hours. Harris complied.
-- Fish & Richardson claimed to what was apparently one of Harris's many personal attorneys that it, not Harris, owned the patents
-- According to the complaint, Fish & Richardson accessed Harris's personal email to find out what he was sending to Niro Scavone

Remember - these are all allegations. It begs all sorts of questions, though. Like, who exactly is behind ICR if it's not Harris? Is it the James Parker guy? Is there any connection between Parker and Harris? If not, then why did Harris have to resign from Fish & Richardson. If you sell your patent and retain no interest, there's no conflict, right? Or is it just that he still has an agreement to cooperate with Parker/ICR?

Anyway, fascinating stuff - a look into the inner-politics of a major patent law firm. A boring patent case by just another troll represented by Ray Niro against Google has turned into a circus of finger-pointing and calls for punitive damages.


Anonymous said...

Are you getting tips on this story, or just investigating on your own?

Either way, really great work exposing something of interest for all patent practitioners. Not enough attention has been paid to ethical issues unique to patent prosecution/litigation, so hopefully this will spark some work on those issues by both the bar and the academy.

Troll Tracker said...

Everything I post is based on public information.

Anonymous said...

Anyone find this ironic? Fish & Richardson represents patent trolls (e.g., Rembrandt) and then gets sued by a patent troll. :-)