Printing businesses refute patent claims in Senate Judiciary Committee hearing
Patent litigation is a term that has become all too familiar in the marketplace. Industries that use technology of any relevance to patent-holders are frequently held liable for infringement if they are not careful with their creation and manufacturing processes.
December 26, 2013 at 04:29 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Patent litigation is a term that has become all too familiar in the marketplace. Industries that use technology of any relevance to patent-holders are frequently held liable for infringement if they are not careful with their creation and manufacturing processes. However, for the printing business, patent claims were unheard of until printers began getting demand letters to print QR codes and use workflow software this past year.
A Direct Marketing report quoted Michael Makin, president and CEO of the Printing Industries of America regarding the increase in the need for education of patent claims. “We have been astounded by the thuggish action of these enterprises,” Makin testified in a hearing on patent trolls held by the Senate Judiciary Committee. “One printer in Kansas received a letter demanding $75,000 to avoid a suit, with the threat that in two weeks it would go up to $90,000. This puts undue stress on an industry already facing low profits and lower demand.”
As the market continues to move from print to digital, printers are at a major disadvantage begin with, add to that lawsuits regarding patent litigation, and you have a situation that is not only unfair, but stands to hurt the future of these businesses. Small printers and large software companies fall victims to patent trolls who use the high cost of litigation and the limited requirements for filing lawsuits to blackmail businesses into paying settlements.
Earlier this month, InsideCounsel reported on news of the Innovation Act being sent to the House committee on a 33-5 vote to determine the future of patent reform. With this law, the legislation will require patent trolls to file claims stating specific patent violations, which will in turn delay the expensive discovery phases of trial until after courts validate each claim.
According to Direct Marketing, judiciary committee chairman Patrick Leahy is now trying to push through a similar bill in the Senate that comes down harder on demand letters. The bill attempts to nip many of the suits in the bud by giving the Federal Trade Commission powers to enforce limits on them.
Like the Innovation Act, the Senate bill includes a fee shifting provision, which will hamper the ability of small inventors to enforce their patent rights. The proposed law could only aid entrepreneurs holding proprietary patents.
For the latest news on patent trolls and litigation claims, read these related articles:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCoinbase Hit With Antitrust Suit That Seeks to Change How Crypto Exchanges Operate
3 minute readBaker Botts' Biopharma Client Sues Former In-House Attorney, Others Alleging Extortion Scheme
Trending Stories
- 1Data Breach Lawsuit Against Byte Federal Among 1,500 Targeting Companies in 2024
- 2Counterfeiters Ride Surge in Tabletop Games’ Popularity, Challenging IP Owners to Keep Up
- 3Health Care Data Breach Class Actions Saw December Surge in NY Courts
- 4Florida Supreme Court Disbars 3, Suspends 11, Reprimands 1 in Final Disciplinary Order of 2024
- 5Chief Justice Roberts Ends Year With Defense Against 'Illegitimate' Attacks on Judiciary
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250