Huber files suit AGAIN
RussMill
| Posted in General Questions on
Well, Huber the makers of zip sheathing and advantech subfloor. Now are going after other mfg’s of products similar to ZIP.
This time its Louisiana Pacific and two other mom n pop mfg.
Georgia Pacific paid huber an undisclosed amount PLUS Royalties. I assume they’ll get the same from lp and others.
Monoply??? Or not?
GBA Detail Library
A collection of one thousand construction details organized by climate and house part
Search and download construction details
Replies
Might be patent trolling, but they might have a legitimate issue too. Intellectual property cases can be tricky.
Bill
One of the articles I read stated a former Huber employee went to work for LP with product secrets.
Yes when you have a unique idea and patent the idea you do have a monopoly for some years.
If someone copies a patented idea and is selling it in the market suing them is the only way to stop them.
Capitalism 101
I would define a “patent trolling” as someone who does not bring products to market but rather files or buys patents and sits on them, hoping someone else will market a product that they can sue for patent infringement making money in court not the marketplace.
Walta
>”I would define a “patent trolling” as someone who does not bring products to market but rather files or buys patents and sits on them, hoping someone else will market a product that they can sue for patent infringement making money in court not the marketplace.”
I agree that’s the usual definition of a “patent troll”, but there are also those who look for any reason to sue. Basically sue anyone for anything even remotely similar to your special gizmo. The overzealous sue-ers are abusing the system too.
If Huber has an ex-employee out there selling the patented info, then that sounds like a legit case of patent infringement to me.
Bill
Patent infringement doesn't have anything to do with whether an employee misappropriated intellectual property. Patents are public documents, available to anyone. And failure to take steps to enforce intellectual property rights can result in a court concluding that the rights have been abandoned. Huber apparently holds patents relating to Zip sheathing and has every right to enforce those patents. If GP ( and the Koch Brothers) had to pay for infringement, I'm OK with that.
True, but if someone is out there actively using the patented info, like in the case of an ex-employee selling the info, that sounds like a pretty clean cut case of patent infringement to me.
If something was independently developed, but it ended up being similar to something someone else had previously patented, that can be a more complex case.
Bill
That might be actionable, maybe criminal, but it isn't patent infringement. As I said, patent info is public. In return for disclosing your invention to the world, you get a monopoly for a period of time.
Most states have laws prohibiting the theft of trade secrets. But by definition, a patent isn't a trade secret.
It wasn't a matter of an ex employee selling information, but rather the ex Huber employee going to work for LP and helping them develop LP's version of Zip Wall using Huber's information.