Litigation Abuse Versus Patent Abuse

The premise that “litigation” by patent-holding entities has spiked in recent years is misleading (C&EN, Jan. 13, page 24). My firm’s own investigation revealed the “spike” is largely an artifact resulting from a change in the law that required plaintiffs to sue each defendant in separate actions.

The jump in infringement claims from 19% in 2006 to 62% in 2012 cited by RPX Corp. is largely a result of this statutory modification in the so-called America Invents Act (AIA). This finding has been supported by extensive studies by university researchers. In truth, the number of patents being asserted in patent litigation on a yearly basis has remained relatively stagnant.

Beware the fox, as well as the “troll.” A “patent-holding entity” as defined in the article is certainly a chimeric creature. Many of the largest companies calling for “reform” have licensed a multitude of their patents for technologies that they do not practice. Our studies show that irrespective of all the bravado about AIA being designed to help research institutes, universities, and small and medium companies, in truth it has helped only the largest companies in the world to challenge the patents of these entities, with minimal impact on the bad litigation trolls.

What we truly need is legislation that stops attorneys from sending frivolous infringement letters. The problem is litigation abuse, not patent abuse.

Steven J. Moore
Stamford, Conn.