Hard Drive Imports to be Banned?

Arathon writes "Apparently the International Trade Commission is beginning an investigation that could lead to the banning of hard drive imports from Western Digital, Seagate, and Toshiba, among others, on the grounds that they fundamentally violate patents held by Steven and Mary Reiber of California. The patent apparently has to do with "dissipative ceramic bonding tips", which are important components of the drives themselves. Obviously, a ban would be unthinkable, and yet the ITC has 45 days to settle on a fixed date for the end of the investigation. If the patents are found to be violated, and the Reibers do not allow those patents to be bought or otherwise dealt with, the importation of almost all hard drives would actually be ceased."

useful arts

[Speare]

And this is promoting the Progress of Science and useful Arts, how, again?

Re:useful arts

[Bert64]

Well, it could spur drive makers to create a replacement technology to get round the ban.
But more likely they'd just revert to some older non infringing technology, resulting in inferior drives for any country which enforces the patent.

Re:useful arts

[Salgat]

Unfortunately many foreign companies love to sell the US patent infringing goods that can be produced legally overseas in countries like China, because they know that when they are finally told to stop due to infringements, that these companies can move on to the next profit and know they made a cheap buck out of it. As much as we all depend on Hard Drives, companies need to stop this crap and start paying the people who actually helped to bring about this technology. As much as I hate patents, the idea of patents and protecting patents can serve as an incentive to bring about new inventions(why bother investing time and money into inventing something that you know will just be stolen by other companies).

Re:useful arts

[Daniel Wood]

I don't know the validity of the patent nor do I know if it was a submarine patent, so I can't comment on that aspect. While the ban would have severe financial impact on most of the magnetic storage industry, if not the entire economy, this could be the real kick in the pants that SSD's need. This has the potential massively increase density and lower costs of SSD's in a very short timeframe. If they can cram 16GB on a SDHC card(Due January 08), imagine how much storage they could put in a 3.5" or even a 1.8" SSD. That said, this ban will not be enacted. The federal government will not allow a ban on imports of magnetic HDDs. Not only because of the financial devastation it has the potential to cause, but because it would severely inconvenience the government as well. Remember the whole BlackBerry patent suit?

Freedom to stop using your brains

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd like to patent the way the American patent bureau works: "The art to put ideas on paper and granting their 'owner' the right to make others pay him money for (ab)using his/her idea no matter how idiotic the idea might be".

At least it's not a software patent

[hedkandee]

because I've spent enough time whining about those

Defend patents

[xsarpedonx]

Isn't there a requirement that you actively defend your patents?

Re:useful arts

[aurispector]

This kind of smells like a patent mugging to me. If all these companies were using the patent, why did it take so long to file suit? Did all these companies ignore due diligence? Is there some sort of standards that were hashed out while the patent was kept underwater like in the Rambus case?

I really think there needs to be some sort of limit on how and when patent holders can do this sort of thing, coupled with some way standards bodies can file public notice regarding intent to use a particular process or design. First to file is not a bad starting point, but prior art could come into play in the context of such a public notice process, e.g. standards board says we are making stuff like this...public period to comment...patents not claimed by 180 days invalid for this case...NO profit for patent holders!

The muggings gotta stop

Re:useful arts

[arivanov]

Or the country simply voiding the patent on national security grounds. Same way USA voided the Right's brothers patents on aircraft design when they proved to be insufficiently cooperative in WWI. Case of been there, dunnit will do it again. While the congress and administration critters could not quite justify that in the RIM case, in this one they may end up doing it.

Follow the law or change it

[tjstork]

This case is a clearcut proof that the patent system doesn't protect the little guy and the little guy hitting it big with a patent is a total myth.

By all rights, the law that the article refers to is designed to ensure that the little guy has another means of recorse to protect his or her patent. But instead, these companies are going to find a judge that kinda agrees with them, and they will be allowed to import these drives despite the patent violation.

Of course, the right thing to do would be to change patent law so that this sort of infringement is something everyone is allowed to do. But oh no, we still want to leave the patent laws on the books, to protect the big guy, from guess who, the small guy.

Living in the EU I almost want this to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

Because it would immediately force your Congress to reform your idiotic laws on patents.

The economic impact would be huge and nobody would be able to ignore that.

Your patent regime is now a threat to global economic prosperity and so reform is vital.

Re:But do prohibitive prices promote progress?

[Ihlosi]

Does that promote the progress of science and useful arts?

It promotes science when everyone suddenly has to find a way to work around the patent.

Re:In Soviet Russia...

[Opportunist]

What's "In Soviet Russia" about it? Afaik, the joke is that ISR it's exactly reverse than it is here.

Ya know, those ISR jokes get quite stale when you can't see the difference between Soviet Russia and our beloved Free World anymore.

How the US became a land of morons

[Anonymous Coward]

The article preceding this one provides an appropriate template here.

The world gazes on spellbound, as the US sinks deeper and deeper into the sheerest idiocy, almost entirely at the hands of lawyers. Politicians used to be the font of all evil and cluelessness, but lawyers (and the people who use them) have surpassed them by lightyears.

Just fricking incredible.

Re:It swings both ways

[DAldredge]

One would think that an IT Manager (or consultant as line 1 doesn't mesh with line 3) who posts on /. would know that Maxtor was bought out by Seagate who is on the list.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:But do prohibitive prices promote progress?

[mumblestheclown]

the inventors are subject to the same laws of supply and demand as everybody else. they can ask a zillion jillion dollars and they won't get it. they can ask for a large some, commensurate with the amount the market values the hard drives buillt using their technologies by companies. This isn't rocket science, people.

Re:useful arts

[Alzheimers]

No, but three Rights make a Left.

Doctrine of laches

[gillbates]

States that a plaintiff may not collect for damages compounded by the plaintiff's actions, or failure to act.

Of course, IANAL. But this is /., so...

For example, if a plaintiff knows his patent is being infringed, he cannot simply wait until after the infringer has produced the product for a number of years and then sue for an inordinate sum. In such a case, the court is not likely to grant royalties for past infringement because the plaintiff knew about it and did nothing to stop it. Future royalties may be awarded, but it is unlikely that any loss which was brought about by the plaintiff's failure to act, or caused by the plaintiff's actions, is unlikely to be recoverable in a court of law.

But there is another aspect to this as well. Corporations go to considerable lengths to protect their trade secrets, and it is very possible this was hidden, as best as possible, from the general public. Because a company seldom publishes the designs for their products - even after production has begun - it is difficult for an inventor to discover patent violations, in general. In this particular case, the inventor(s) probably had to buy one of each manufacturer's hard drives and inspect them. The cost for doing this alone probably ran several thousand dollars.

So while inventors should be vigilant, there are legitimate reasons why patent violations sometimes take years to discover. Companies are often very secretive about their product designs (and for good reason), so it makes discovering a violation difficult. Most independent inventors do not have the resources to buy one of every product on the market and disassemble it, looking for violations.

Patents are not evil

[iknownuttin]

I'm seeing a lot of posts here about the evils of patents and how they stifle innovation. They don't. And unfortunately, folks forget the story about the inventors of the MRI machine.

These guys spent decades and millions of dollars of their own and investors' money creating this machine. When they get it to market, General Electric and Hitachi just steals the idea and markets it. Pretty much destroying the company that was started by the inventors. They then sued over another decade or so finally getting a settlement. IF they just sat back, others would have profited off of their work. That's an injustice if I've ever seen one!

Without the inventor with the hopes of making it big and getting a return to their investors, they WILL BE NO INCENTIVE TO INNOVATE. Some of the MRI Story [about.com]. (Wikipedia has some of the business stuff wrong)

more history [columbia.edu]

I don't care about the very few patent trolls or whatever, I know there's abuse, but we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water.

Re:useful arts

[Dunbal]

Well, it could spur drive makers to create a replacement technology to get round the ban.

      Causing them to reinvent the wheel in a wasteful manner, instead of building on today's technology to develop tomorrow's technology.

Re:Living in the EU I almost want this to happen

[wilsonjd]

just what we need: Congress making knee-jerk reaction legislation about things they don't understand.

Re:useful arts

[BLKMGK]

Yes because it's so much better to sink piles of money into R&D only to have some other company copy the technology and sell it for less due to their not having to recoup the R&D costs.

Get a clue.

This is how China is taking many American companies (and others) to the cleaners. Why bother to innovate or invent something when you can simply copy what someone else has done at little to no cost? Done often enough and the folks who do the innovative things are going to find themselves bankrupt - then what? I'm all for patent reform and I think software patents need to be rethought but you make it sound as if ALL patents are somehow "bad" and that's just naive. Yes, a limited monopoly can be had with the right patent and this is why they need to eventually expire - and do! The drug industry, abusive as it is, is a good example of this. If you've EVER bought a generic drug than you've seen this process at work. Sadly the drug companies have combated this not by striving for better research but my making minor changes to existing drugs and re-patenting and by spending more on advertisement than they do R&d. Why do we allow them to advertise prescription only drugs to the public exactly?

Re:useful arts

[perlchild]

Encryption's been classified as munitions, so wouldn't a hard drive be classifiable too?

Re:But do prohibitive prices promote progress?

[BLKMGK]

In a word? YES! They invented it they get to set the price. If it's a valid innovation that's so valuable that everyone copied it then obviously it should be well rewarded. If it was something obvious then it should never have received the patent.

What did these companies do prior to this technology? Did these companies get the technology from these people or discover it separately on their own? It's not cut and dry but if these folks discovered this on their own, patent it, and then have the technology co-opted then yeah they need to be reimbursed for it and the companies spanked. It's not like the rules for IP theft were somehow not understood. The big question becomes, is their claim valid....

As for progress of science and arts, if this process is fenced off and unavailable then these companies will have to come up with something else or license the technology. That's a part of doing business. If it's not a terribly innovative idea it will be worked around - that's an advance. Stealing technology isn't something we ought to encourage or allow.

Re:useful arts

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course, you realize that this very case we're discussing is of TWO INDIVIDUALS who own a patent used by all hard drive manufacturers, so your argument is specious.

Didn't see that one coming, did ya!

Take THAT!

Re:useful arts

[Anonymous Coward]

You get a clue. You're deeply naive, having bought the "patents reward innovation" Big Lie hook, line and sinker.

sell it for less due to their not having to recoup the R&D costs.

That's the risk of R&D. the innovator still has first-mover advantage. Patents allow the risk-averse to compete unfairly with risk takers. You're committing something akin to the broken window fallacy. In reality, EVERYONE is better off if innovations can be freely built upon, even other innovators. No innovator stands aloof. Frankly, I'm disgusted by the american infofascistic "dream", it flies in the face of millenia of human progress dependent on open sharing of information.

Why bother to innovate or invent something when you can simply copy what someone else has done at little to no cost

First mover advantage. COMPETITION. The essence of free market capitalist economic theory - the only way to stay in business would be to innovate continuously. Patent monopolies exist to slow innovation to levels manageable by the establishment of bankers and lawyers and such social parasites.

and re-patenting

This is only possible because the patent system exists. Destroy the patent system, and they won't be able to do that.

(The drug industry specifically also has other problems - overzealous FDA regulation for instance.)

Re:useful arts

[Anonymous Coward]

Getting rid of patents might cause a flurry of innovation at first, but when companies slow down their innovation due to the insufficient intellectual resources (you are a fool if you think the same company can constantly innovate with product cycles so small) and have no way to protect their previous inventions, they will die. Who will step up to continue to innovate, knowing that all of their R&D is only good for a few months at best before somebody else can get a duplicate to market? That's a stupid risk. It would be safer to not innovate at all and just wait for somebody else to do it.

Re:useful arts

[jedidiah]

Ok, then where are the cigarette commercials?

How bout some dynamite commercials?

Mebbe throw in some Anthrax commercials.

If the customer can't buy it without permission or
highly unlikely licensing then it really makes no
sense to allow TV advertisements for it.

Re:useful arts

[p0tat03]

Oh please. For every stupid "procedure improvement method" patent out there there are many others that are quite valid and truly innovative. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater, so on and so forth. Innovation needs to be protected - I would know, I'm Chinese and I know many relatives and acquaintances who are directly involved with ripping off innovative products from other countries (and even amongst themselves).

While overly vague and general patents are a problem, legitimate inventions need to be protected. It is also the same reason why, should I ever decide to invent something, I will insist on having it made in a 1st-world, preferably Western nation, despite the increased costs of doing so. At least I can sleep easier knowing that, should someone rip me off I can sue without having to worry about where the judge's new BMW came from.

Re:useful arts

[macdaddy357]

They used to market only to doctors, and should go back to that. You don't just go to a doctor and say "I would like to order some of the pills I saw on TV." Any doctor who doesn't flatly refuse such a request should lose his license to practice medicine.

Re:useful arts

[rbanffy]

If many people skilled in the arts take a couple months and several experiments and tests to find the same idea that happens to be the best way to solve a problem within a given technological framework, it cannot be said to be obvious. Were it that obvious, someone would have figured it out in minutes.

We don't know how long it took for the Reibers to figure it out or how much they invested in it. The same goes with the hard-disk makers - we don't know how many prototypes or technologies they scrapped before arriving at the same answers as the Reibers.

Re:useful arts

[ChrisMaple]

Sure they want to get paid by manufacturers building products in a foreign country with tools patented only in the US. Tough luck. That's not how the laws are written. As long as the tool requiring the patent wasn't built in the US or imported into the US, it's not infringing.

Re:useful arts

[hey!]

Only if you believe that patents exist to maximize economic utility.

If you believe patents exist to protect property rights, then the most innovative fields need strongest patent protection.

If you discuss patents with somebody and don't get this distinction out of the way, chances are you'll end up talking past them. What is obvious from one point of view is completely illogical from the other.

Re:Anyone know when hard drive manufacturers start

[surprise_audit]

So, this Dissipative ceramic bonding tool tip does exactly what in a hard drive?? Or is it in fact part of the machinery for manufacturing hard drives?? If the latter, how can the drives be banned from import?? Seems kinda ridiculous to ban a non-infringing object solely because it was created using an infringing machine/process. Hard disks can't be the only imports built using patent-infringing machines/processes...

Re:Living in the EU I almost want this to happen

[surprise_audit]

Economic impact?? How about if they settle for a $1 "license" per imported disk?? That would quickly add up to a nice retirement fund for the patent holder without being a very big hardship to anyone buying the disks.

Patents only work in a closed system.

[krunk7]

Here's why. Company Y files a patent in country X. Company A located in country B sees patent, but could give a shit less. Company A copies product adding a few innovations to make it better and then sells the superior product for less to every country except X.

Who loses out in this scenario? Every company in country X except Y. Since there, the technology is completely off limits.

You want a lock on your tech, keep it a trade secret. If it's easily backwards engineered and mass produced, it probably wasn't that huge a leap anyway.

Re:useful arts

[JonathanR]

Only if the three rights average greater than 60

Steven and Mary Reiber are obviously terrorists

[aristotle-dude]

Steven and Mary Reiber should be sent to Guantanamo bay. They obviously are bent on disrupting world economies without offering an alternative. If this sort of extortion is not terrorism, I don't know what is.