Livefyre Profile

Activity Stream

Erin:

 

The US Patent system was viewed as so important that it was enshrined in article 1 on the US Constitution. You may not like it, but it is here to stay.

Just because a patent has an old date does not mean it is frivolous. An old date is typically very helpful in establishing validity against prior art. Why not let the courts decide the validity of the claims instead of unfounded opinions.  As I understand it, ComScore paid $19MM to acquire these patents, because they needed them to  develop a non infringing solution. Obviously, unless your stupid, you don't pay that amount of money and expand  substantial engineering efforts, if you feel the IP is "loose" and open it up for everyone to use for free. You may also note know the visibility code is in Javascript, which can be eaily analyzed and reverse engineered. That is what in fact happened when Comscore introduced its service.

 

As for the Comscore case, you are wrong about the three companies doing visibility before Comscore. None of them had anything that works and would pass a requirement of measuring ad visibility in unfriendly iframes, a critical issue given that those iframes are used for the majority of ad networks and ad exchanges, which constitute the majority of display inventory.

 

As for the startup argument, startups a great at introducing innovative products. But, that does not give them license to copy someone else's IP, and violate a right guaranteed by the US constitution if they are indeed infringing.

 

As one of the comments said, if you don't like patents, then try to change the patent law, but just realize that this is not any law that you would have to change, it is the US constitution. Also, next time you develop anything valuable instead of blabbing about stuff you don't know, you may feel the need to protect what you created.

 

1 year, 11 months ago on ComScore’s Lawsuit Against Three Startups Is Pretty Deplorable

Reply