I think if you're a billionaire already, the better strategy would be to file those patents and never prosecute anyone because of them. Not filing for a patent leaves the option for a patent troll to do so.
Seems practical, but patent trolls are just going to patent something else anyway. They're patenting basic ideas at this point, and there is an unlimited supply of patentable ideas.
There's a few things that I could have patented in the '80s and 90's, but didn't, becase they were in my engineering supervisors word's: "F______g obvious." Later I went back and found out that someone elsewhere did receive a patent on some of these ideas. Don't know if they received money for any licenses, but somewhere in a corporate vault/storage are my engineering logbooks in case of a legal dispute.
Mark Cuban is interesting person. Back in the day (Web 1.0 and Audionet), I had lunch with him and a few others at the Infomart. I questioned his business, since at the time a single radio station had more listeners than what was capable with the bandwidth of the Internet then. He said, "X, we don't sell the steak, we sell the sizzle."
None of what he listed in this blog post is original. The sizzle comment is insightful. He doesn't like patent trolls but knew how to hype/sell Broadcast.com.
He's at least 10 years late on multicast networks. Here's the 1985 RFC that's considerably more detailed than his from 1996:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc966
9 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 28.2 ms ] threadThe only solution is to fix the patent system.
Precisely the point of his blog post.
Mark Cuban is interesting person. Back in the day (Web 1.0 and Audionet), I had lunch with him and a few others at the Infomart. I questioned his business, since at the time a single radio station had more listeners than what was capable with the bandwidth of the Internet then. He said, "X, we don't sell the steak, we sell the sizzle."
An interesting cognitive dissonance.