Patent trolls continue to target SMBs despite upcoming Innovation Act ruling
When it comes to patent trolls, big enterprises and manufacturing companies primarily have the upper hand over small-medium sized businesses due to their assisting legal teams and deep pockets.
January 08, 2014 at 04:30 AM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
When it comes to patent trolls, big enterprises and manufacturing companies primarily have the upper hand over small-medium sized businesses (SMBs) due to their assisting legal teams and deep pockets. So what does an SMB, embedded in the technology sector do to protect itself from patent trolls who not only attempt to collect licensing fees from potential infringers, but have no actual intent to sell or license the product in question to begin with? The unfortunate answer is, not much.
With new technology entering the market faster than manufacturers have time to keep up, the war on patent trolls is continuing to become more prevalent in the U.S. In fact, a recent Southeast Texas Records report suggests that our legal system is actually increasingly being manipulated to allow entities to threaten and bring frivolous lawsuits against legitimate businesses around the country.
According to Southeast Texas Records, patent suits only continue to increase and put small businesses at risk. Since 2011, the number of these lawsuits alone has tripled, costing our economy $80 billion each year.
“The shakedown process over questionable patents has become so widespread that the business community has sought additional relief from Congress in the form of The Innovation Act,” Scott Joslove, president and CEO of the Texas Hotel & Lodging Association said. Patent trolls repeat the pattern of utilizing alleged patents as a way of seeking quick financial compensation through abusive lawsuits against the underdog. By targeting vulnerable SMBs, larger organizations have a better chance of winning the patent claims and preventing small businesses from distributing their products associated with the technology in question, which can be detrimental to their business depending on their size and revenue.
While it may seem that SMBs will never stand a chance against the bigger manufacturers, the good news is that a number of partner state associations around the country are working directly with policymakers on Capitol Hill to try to protect smaller companies from these predatory practices. If the U.S. House of Representatives votes in favor of The Innovation Act, smaller businesses will gain financial security and relief from unreasonable predatory lawsuits and patent trolls.
For more news on patent trolls, check out these related reports on Inside Counsel:
When it comes to patent trolls, big enterprises and manufacturing companies primarily have the upper hand over small-medium sized businesses (SMBs) due to their assisting legal teams and deep pockets. So what does an SMB, embedded in the technology sector do to protect itself from patent trolls who not only attempt to collect licensing fees from potential infringers, but have no actual intent to sell or license the product in question to begin with? The unfortunate answer is, not much.
With new technology entering the market faster than manufacturers have time to keep up, the war on patent trolls is continuing to become more prevalent in the U.S. In fact, a recent Southeast Texas Records report suggests that our legal system is actually increasingly being manipulated to allow entities to threaten and bring frivolous lawsuits against legitimate businesses around the country.
According to Southeast Texas Records, patent suits only continue to increase and put small businesses at risk. Since 2011, the number of these lawsuits alone has tripled, costing our economy $80 billion each year.
“The shakedown process over questionable patents has become so widespread that the business community has sought additional relief from Congress in the form of The Innovation Act,” Scott Joslove, president and CEO of the Texas Hotel & Lodging Association said. Patent trolls repeat the pattern of utilizing alleged patents as a way of seeking quick financial compensation through abusive lawsuits against the underdog. By targeting vulnerable SMBs, larger organizations have a better chance of winning the patent claims and preventing small businesses from distributing their products associated with the technology in question, which can be detrimental to their business depending on their size and revenue.
While it may seem that SMBs will never stand a chance against the bigger manufacturers, the good news is that a number of partner state associations around the country are working directly with policymakers on Capitol Hill to try to protect smaller companies from these predatory practices. If the U.S. House of Representatives votes in favor of The Innovation Act, smaller businesses will gain financial security and relief from unreasonable predatory lawsuits and patent trolls.
For more news on patent trolls, check out these related reports on Inside Counsel:
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
© 2025 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 AllBest Practices for Adopting and Adapting to AI: Mitigating Risk in Light of Increasing Regulatory and Shareholder Scrutiny
7 minute readFOMO Run Amok? Resolve of Firms Chasing AI Dreams Tested by Sky-High Costs
Trending Stories
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