alt Hacker NewsThe question I keep asking is: why? They give these patents to random people, and 5 or 10% of the proceeds if they win the suits. What do they get out of it?
If they were legit, then I don't see the need to assign the patents they own to someone else before litigating. Unless there's a gotcha, and it's a scam somehow.
Very strange, and just another reason why patents should probably be non-transferrable and "use it or lose it".
Replies
As I understand it (not completely), according to the SHIELD act, the losing party in a patent dispute has to pay legal fees for both sides, which are usually substantial. If the lawyers who really own the patent represent themselves, they are in danger of having to pay out if they lose. So they effectively hired a plaintiff that they could 'represent'. Handing out 10% of the proceeds if you win against halving the costs if you lose is a reasonable hedge.
However a legal firm is not supposed to do that, which is why they are in trouble.
If the lawsuit goes bad and the random people foolish enough to sign up take the legal liability, and the folks behind the scenes take none of the risks and remain hidden.
They are the fall guys. Except the judge wasn’t having any of their BS.
The "random people" are exposed to countersuits/liability in the event of a loss.
https://news.bloomberglaw.com/ip-law/judges-litigation-fundi...
> Connolly ultimately concluded that the arrangements were unfair to the LLC owners and that Pugal, Bui, and Hall should’ve had independent counsel advising them. He wrote that IP Edge structured the LLCs so that it received the lion’s share of the litigation benefits while the the on-paper owners “assume all the risk” from the lawsuits, including attorneys’ fees awards or court-imposed sanctions.