Somehow, Innovatio is able to go on a rampage of suing anyone who is using WiFi for infringing on certain patents that they had just recently acquired from Broadcom Corporation. Innovatio for now says they won’t set sight on everyday users yet, because they are going after hotels and coffee shops and other bigger entities that are using WiFi without the approvals of some sorts from Innovatio. Cisco Systems and Motorola Solutions, Inc. ask the Delaware federal court to declare the patents Innovatio had that are in relation to WiFi as invalid patents.
Even a tiny possibility that Innovatio might get its way of declaring that everyone who has WiFi is infringing on its patents, you and I will be liable to certain penalties. Imagine how many people like you and I are using WiFi as we speak! How about the people from all over the world! This makes me wonder — Can U.S. patents in relation to WiFi command any dictation over the WiFi usage outside of the United States? You know?
If patents of WiFi that cannot dictate certain terms for the rest of the world but only within U.S., and yet WiFi is so widely use that one can make an analogy of it to utility, isn’t this unfair for the WiFi users within the U.S.? Can that point alone make the idea of having patent on something as utility as purely impractical and will lead to chaos within the information industry? Can that point alone justify the idea of having patents for WiFi — which parallels to how Cisco Systems and Motorola Solutions, Inc.’s calling for Delaware federal court to declare Innovatio’s WiFi patents to be invalid — to be abolished?
I think this case of Innovatio’s rampage on demanding for compensations on WiFi’s patents might fervently bring forth some of those mystical patent arguments, whether that be the arguments of patents on innovations that can be categorized as utility type or on something else which isn’t yet clearly defined at this point in time. I’m certainly not in any position to argue on patents of anything, because I have no experience in this particular field at all. Nonetheless, using common sense, I think WiFi users should not bear even the slightest responsibility of compensating for the infringement of WiFi patents, because after all users have had actually paid for WiFi products — agreeing that the makers of WiFi routers and so on to already price in the costs of patent licensing. I insist that this is absurd and beyond my common sense! What do you think?