This is so stupid and completely against the spirit of the patent system. Sure, Sonos had a good idea and patented it — good for you! I might think it’s trivial but that’s not my department. And Google agreed it was a good idea, so they put into Chromecast. Then because it was Sonos’ idea they’re entitled to reasonable compensation when people use it specifically because they chose to share it with the world. But to turn around and use your patent to keep others from using your work misses the point entirely.
It’s like we create these systems specifically to make the world a worse place. Both the patent system that allows itself to be weaponized like this, and our economic environment that rewards companies for hurting each other. The very definition of unhealthy competition.
Do we know they were offered reasonable compensation and turned it down in favor of weaponization?
Also, there has been a long-running legal issue between sonos and several other tech companies. I believe centered on them just ignoring the patent and releasing features without acknowledgement (nevermind compensation). Its entirely reasonable in this case to say "until we agree to terms, i want you to STOP violating my patent"
It is completely abusing, because it is not a technical knowledge here but just a usage.
I did not spend time looking at the patent, but I can't understand how they could have a patent on remotely turning up a volume otherwise they would have a patent on remote control.
3 comments
[ 3.7 ms ] story [ 23.2 ms ] threadIt’s like we create these systems specifically to make the world a worse place. Both the patent system that allows itself to be weaponized like this, and our economic environment that rewards companies for hurting each other. The very definition of unhealthy competition.
Do we know they were offered reasonable compensation and turned it down in favor of weaponization?
Also, there has been a long-running legal issue between sonos and several other tech companies. I believe centered on them just ignoring the patent and releasing features without acknowledgement (nevermind compensation). Its entirely reasonable in this case to say "until we agree to terms, i want you to STOP violating my patent"
I did not spend time looking at the patent, but I can't understand how they could have a patent on remotely turning up a volume otherwise they would have a patent on remote control.