Wisconsin patent troll bill makes it to Governor’s desk
A much-lauded bill aiming at stemming the power of patent troll litigation has been approved in Wisconsins legislative bodies, and is now waiting to be signed into law.
March 26, 2014 at 05:28 AM
6 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
The bill that was working its way through Wisconsin state legislative bodies last week has officially been approved by the state Assembly, and is moving to the desk of Governor Scott Walker for signing into law.
The legislation has been designed to work against companies known as “patent trolls” that actively pursue other companies — often smaller ones, startups, or individual inventors — in court. Patent trolls frequently play the roles of owners of the patents, but without actually inventing anything using the technology, or employing it for their own contributions to whatever field the patent is in. Instead, patent trolls will simply buy up patents in order to then extract licensing fees from other companies wanting to use the technology.
Many see this strategy as anti-innovation, and discouraging for many startups that would explore their business ideas or the development of new products, but for the exorbitant fees that patent trolls require to license their patents or be taken to court. And, indeed, the legislation is designed to prevent patent trolls from heedlessly bringing other organizations to court and requiring them to jump through a few hoops.
The soon-to-be law covers the enforcing of thorough written communications — or “demand letters” — that are required by court in order to take another entity to the courtroom for patent violation. The demand letters will more extensively require basis for theory on each patent claim being asserted, and other specifications.
The Washington Examiner describes some of the further parameters the bill — known as SB 498 — puts into action: “The bill would allow the state Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection, or DATCP, or the attorney general to investigate an alleged violation of the bill's requirements. It would authorize the attorney general to initiate a court action for an injunction of a violation of the bill's requirements, and in such an action, the bill would authorize the court to make any necessary orders to restore to any person any pecuniary loss the person may have suffered as a result of the violation. SB 498 also would allow the attorney general to seek a forfeiture to the state of up to $50,000 for each violation of the bill's requirements.”
Whether or not this type of legislation will actually deter patent trolls remains to be seen, especially because patent trolling is a widespread problem — and not just in the U.S. Inside Counsel's Amanda Ciccatelli describes the international problem of patent trolling, with some notable problems in Australia, Canada, and Russia.
Further reading:
The bill that was working its way through Wisconsin state legislative bodies last week has officially been approved by the state Assembly, and is moving to the desk of Governor Scott Walker for signing into law.
The legislation has been designed to work against companies known as “patent trolls” that actively pursue other companies — often smaller ones, startups, or individual inventors — in court. Patent trolls frequently play the roles of owners of the patents, but without actually inventing anything using the technology, or employing it for their own contributions to whatever field the patent is in. Instead, patent trolls will simply buy up patents in order to then extract licensing fees from other companies wanting to use the technology.
Many see this strategy as anti-innovation, and discouraging for many startups that would explore their business ideas or the development of new products, but for the exorbitant fees that patent trolls require to license their patents or be taken to court. And, indeed, the legislation is designed to prevent patent trolls from heedlessly bringing other organizations to court and requiring them to jump through a few hoops.
The soon-to-be law covers the enforcing of thorough written communications — or “demand letters” — that are required by court in order to take another entity to the courtroom for patent violation. The demand letters will more extensively require basis for theory on each patent claim being asserted, and other specifications.
The Washington Examiner describes some of the further parameters the bill — known as SB 498 — puts into action: “The bill would allow the state Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection, or DATCP, or the attorney general to investigate an alleged violation of the bill's requirements. It would authorize the attorney general to initiate a court action for an injunction of a violation of the bill's requirements, and in such an action, the bill would authorize the court to make any necessary orders to restore to any person any pecuniary loss the person may have suffered as a result of the violation. SB 498 also would allow the attorney general to seek a forfeiture to the state of up to $50,000 for each violation of the bill's requirements.”
Whether or not this type of legislation will actually deter patent trolls remains to be seen, especially because patent trolling is a widespread problem — and not just in the U.S. Inside Counsel's Amanda Ciccatelli describes the international problem of patent trolling, with some notable problems in Australia, Canada, and Russia.
Further reading:
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 AllOpenAI Hires First Compliance Chief, Snagging Uber's Scott Schools
Meta Hit With Class Action for Allegedly Using Pirated Books to Train AI Models
Trending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
- 3Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
- 4Meet the Lawyers on Kamala Harris' Transition Team
- 5Trump Files $10B Suit Against CBS in Amarillo Federal Court
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