Bill,

Blackbird chooses its victims based on whether any of a couple dozen vague 
patents they hold can plausibly be used to extort money out of a victim 
company. BB doesn’t go after service providers in particular, it just happens 
to have chosen a service provider (unwisely, it turns out) in this case.

There are no operational issues here. No individual Internet protocol or 
technology “many of  us use” was named. The patent was invalid on its face, as 
it only described an abstract idea — “Providing an internet third party data 
channel” — in the most general terms possible, not as an invention, as required 
by U.S. patent law.

The only difference between Cloudfare and BB’s other victims was that, rather 
than compute the instant cost-benefit analysis most companies do (“It will cost 
us tens of thousands to fight this, but only a few thousand to settle” ), 
Cloudfare valiantly chose to stand on principle, rather than mathematics, and 
fought the claim. By that simple act, the case by BB was thrown out virtually 
instantaneously.

Judge Vince Chhabria held that “abstract ideas are not patentable” and 
Blackbird’s assertion of the patent “attempts to monopolize the abstract idea 
of monitoring a preexisting data stream between a server and a client” was not 
an invention. The case was rejected before it started because the court found 
Blackbird’s patent to be invalid.

The choice to fold or fight in a patent troll battle is clearly a philosophical 
one, not a network operational decision. Now, rather than lengthen this 
out-of-policy thread further, I will take the non-valiant “fold” path, and 
leave the rest of you to your perpetual arguments.

 -mel

On Apr 28, 2021, at 10:41 AM, William Herrin <b...@herrin.us> wrote:

On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 10:20 AM Mel Beckman <m...@beckman.org> wrote:
This dispute is no different than if they had gotten into an argument
over a copier toner scammer.

Hi Mel,

If the patents at issue pertained to copier toner I might agree with
you. They're networking patents purporting to govern technologies many
if not most of us use.

Regards,
Bill Herrin


--
William Herrin
b...@herrin.us
https://bill.herrin.us/

Reply via email to