Today's Date: December 20, 2014 Search | Home | Contact | Services | Patent Attorney | Patent Search | Provisional Patent Application | Patent Application | Software Patent | Confidentiality Agreements

Posts Tagged ‘ rico ’ Who to Contact to Get Removed

Posted: Friday, Jan 18, 2013 @ 11:52 am | Written by Gene Quinn | 22 comments
| Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in: Copyright, Gene Quinn, Internet, IP News, Articles is one of those sites on the Internet that is the poster-child for everything wrong with the anonymity of Internet communications. Shrouded in the secrecy provided by the Internet, anonymous cowards become emboldened to say vile things and stoop to ridiculous lows — even publishing pictures of minors and asking the Internet community to vote on whether the minor is a jerk. That is the business is in, and they refuse to remove any profile that has been created regardless of the vile, anonymous comments that have been posted.

An earlier edition of the “REMOVE” page explained:

No one’s profile is ever removed because Jerk is based on searching free open internet searching databases and it’s not possible to remove things from the Internet. You can however use Jerk to manage your reputation and resolve disputes with people who you are in conflict with.

That obviously ridiculous and inaccurate statement of fact and law has been watered down now, but based on what I hear from those who feel aggrieved by suggests that their philosophy seems to continue to be that no one gets removed. almost seems to play the part of victim, suggesting that it is impossible to remove something from their servers. It is certainly possible for to remove a profile.

Indicia of Extortion – Federal Circuit Slams Patent Troll

Posted: Thursday, Aug 4, 2011 @ 12:27 pm | Written by Gene Quinn | 9 comments
| Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in: Federal Circuit, Gene Quinn, IP News, Articles, Patent Litigation, Patent Troll Basics, Patent Trolls, Patents

Last week the Federal Circuit handed a major victory to a defendant who fought a baseless patent infringement litigation, giving hope that the district courts and the Federal Circuit have had enough of patent litigation used as a ploy to shake down defendants. In Eon-Net v. Flagstar Bancorp, the district court found that Eon-Net’s litigation misconduct and its filing of a baseless infringement action in bad faith for an improper purpose warranted an exceptional case finding. The Federal Circuit decision, with Judge Lourie writing and Judges Mayer and O’Malley joining, concluded that the district court did not clearly err in finding and addressing the litigation misconduct.

As a result of the misconduct found, Judge Martinez of the United States Federal District Court for the Western District of Washington slapped the patentee-plaintiff with Rule 11 sanctions totaling $141,984.70 for failure to perform a reasonable pre-filing investigation. The district court also awarded the defendant $489,150.48 in attorneys fees and costs pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285. The Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s rulings and cited with approval the district court’s characterization of the underlying lawsuit as bearing “indicia of extortion.”