Reuters: Netflix Has Edge in Lawsuits

Reuters is reporting that Netflix might have have the "upper hand" in the patent war with Blockbuster, Netflix has edge in Blockbuster lawsuits-attorneys.

Attorney Marc Lieberstein of Pitney Hardin agreed that Netflix's case looked strong except for its failure to disclose prior art before applying for its first patent.

If Netflix prevails, it could force Blockbuster and any other competitor in the fast-growing online rental industry to pay licensing fees or come up with a completely new model, the attorneys said.

Comments

[NetflixShill]

This just shows how broken the patent system is. Only in America. Other countries woke up from this silly delusion. When will the USA follow suit? Abolish IP which is nothing but Protectionism any way. Legalize Freedom. You have no moral right to make money off of old work. Why should Tom Cruise or Sony or J. K. Rowling get money for the rest of their life without doing any work? Creative people have no need for IP laws. They get paid for work, not collecting patents and copyrights.

Think of all the innovation and variety that we're denied by this protectionist system. A person should be free to do what they want, and use culture as they want - remixing it, creating derivative works, incorporating it into new works, parodying it, re-making it, publishing, selling it, etc. Nobody should be given a monopoly over ideas by the state, regardless of what rich white slave-owners believed hundreds of years ago.

[moviejunkie]

Netflix....buy a clue! It isn't gonna happen.

[Aron]

"Nobody should be given a monopoly over ideas by the state, regardless of what rich white slave-owners believed hundreds of years ago.
"

Wow. The internet's gift of giving voice to all cuts both ways.

[Ricklogic]

The lawsuit is just more baloney from Netflix. The omission of 'Prior Art' fits the pattern for Netflix and I hope they live to regret it in 'court.' Anyway, the lawsuit, which will go on for years, won't matter much.

Within 18 to 24 months, the real powerhouses in the business will give the download/streaming space some serious traction and that will significantly reduce the extent to which Netflix matters. No, Netflix cannot outbid the competition, Too many and too big for that to happen. Comcast alone pays $5,000,000,000 to content programmers each year.

[Hunter McDaniel]

NetflixShill, those rich white slaveowners envisoned a very limited scope for patents and copyrights, and I think they would frankly be appalled by how it has morphed into Intellectual Property over the past 50 years; the very term IP was invented to mislead the public into giving copyrights the same reverence as title to your house.

The first US copyright law gave authors a term of 14 years, renewable once - in an era when the pace of innovation was very slow. It seems very ironic that we now lock up copyrights for life + 75 years in the modern era, when the pace at which we need to reuse ideas and expressions has accelerated.

[tim]

While competition is always good (it was due to Blockbuster that Netflix's prices are as low as they are), I do think that Netflix put a lot of hard work ($250 million) into making a system that works so well and is profitable, so they should get something more than just profits for it ... maybe some sort of exlusive rights?

IP in the US was made "To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries." Maybe I'm cynical, but I doubt there would be nearly as much general progress in this country without IP.

[tim]

Oh, and Hunter, I'm pretty sure it's life +95 years now, due to the Sonny Bono Act.