- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
U.S. default judgment is now a massive $50 million
From the CAP Newswire:October 9, 2008 (InfoPowa News) — The acrimonious patents dispute between 1st Technology LLC and the online gambling group Bodog has entered a new phase following the failure of a Bodog appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit this week.
The matter has its roots in a patents infringement claim launched in June 2007 in a Nevada court by 1st Technology, which Bodog failed to attend amid arguments regarding the proper service of process. In the case, 1st Tech obtained a default judgement for $46,597,849 and the confiscation of Bodog domains, which forced a rebranding exercise. A subsequent case in Washington State likewise did not go well for the online gambling group.
Bodog apparently appealed the hefty default judgment in an effort to overturn the District Court of Nevada judge’s ruling, and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has now supported the lower court’s ruling.
The amount due to 1st Technology from Bodog now exceeds $50 million, says 1st Tech CEO Dr. Scott Lewis.
“We cannot be more pleased,” Lewis says of the failure of the appeal. “Bodog has consistently tried to circumvent the United States justice system, and disregarded the legitimacy of our claims against it. We now have the certainty we need to accelerate our seizure of any and all global assets to satisfy the judgment, and bring fairness and respect back to Bodog’s commercial dealings.”
Flachsbart & Greenspoon LLC, a Chicago law firm, won the appeal for 1st Technology in Appeal No. 2008-1132.
The failure of Bodog’s appeal follows a victory for 1st Tech in the District of Western Washington last week, where a court granted significant parts of a preliminary injunction to halt any transactions or transfers of Bodog’s trademarks.
The co-pending lawsuit in Washington seeks (among other claims) to undo conveyances among defendants Bodog Entertainment Group S.A., Bodog IP Holdings Ltd., and GK World Link Telecom S.A. Both Flachsbart & Greenspoon and Venkat Balasubramani represent 1st Technology in Case No. 08-CV-872 in the Western District of Washington.
frikin patent trolls. i think the US patent office needs to completely revise its software patenting laws. currently they software engineering is considered to be on par with normal engineering, while they obviously differ in methods and the amount of ‘discoveries’ that software engineering can come up with just because its faster.
besides, there are so many software patents, and so many of them are purposefully vague, that it is nearly impossible to find out if one is breaking any patents when creating some kind of software solution. while this doesn’t hamper big companies because they hold lots of patents and sign deals with each other on cross-patent usage, it only affects small companies that dont have the resources nor the time to fight large companies.
considering that its the smaller companies that really come up with “creative solutions”, the current US software patenting laws are hampering development. Its interesting that in EU the laws are a lot stricter than in US…
