RPX has begun a new, free program – OPEN – that seeks to increase transparency in the patent marketplace, while also reducing transaction costs and shrinking the troll marketplace.  Members of OPEN agree to provide RPX and OPEN members 45 day notice before selling any patent to a troll.  That gives OPEN members and/or RPX

The following post is from my Holland & Knight colleague Anthony Fuga.  Anthony regularly works with me defending retailers and their supply chains against patent infringement demands, and he is a period contributor to the Retail Patent Litigation Blog.  Also, please note that one of the articles Anthony discusses references RPX.  In the interest

Professor Colleen Chien from Santa Clara Law spoke at the December 10 DOJ/FTC troll conference.  As a follow up to the conference, she offered IAM Magazine her thoughts attempting to put our current troll situation, which she acknowledges is “disruptive” for business, with two other historical periods of increased troll activity involving railroads and sewing

The Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice are teaming up to look at the patent troll problem.  Initially, the FTC and the DOJ are seeking public comment regarding the impact of trolls (or “patent assertion entities”).  You can send public comments to ATR.LPS-PAEPublicComments@usdoj.gov until March 10, 2013. In addition to seeking public comments,

The scholars of Boston University have provided another thought-provoking analysis of the costs of patent troll litigation.  The article is backed by some excellent and thought-provoking data from RPX and the Coalition for Patent Fairness.  For context, this is what the article says about the state of patent troll litigation:

  • There were 5,842 patent troll