Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Jury Finds Newegg Infringed Patent, Owes $2.3 Million

Soulskill posted about 9 months ago | from the battle-lost-war-continues dept.

Patents 324

Jah-Wren Ryel sends this quote from Ars: "Newegg, an online retailer that has made a name for itself fighting the non-practicing patent holders sometimes called 'patent trolls,' sits on the losing end of a lawsuit tonight. An eight-person jury came back shortly after 7:00pm and found that the company infringed all four asserted claims of a patent owned by TQP Development, a company owned by patent enforcement expert Erich Spangenberg. The jury also found that the patent was valid, apparently rejecting arguments by famed cryptographer Whitfield Diffie. Diffie took the stand on Friday to argue on behalf of Newegg and against the patent. In total, the jury ordered Newegg to pay $2.3 million, a bit less than half of the $5.1 million TQP's damage expert suggested. ... TQP's single patent is tied to a failed modem business run by Michael Jones, formerly president of Telequip. TQP has acquired more than $45 million in patent licensing fees by getting settlements from a total of 139 companies since TQP argues that its patent covers SSL or TLS combined with the RC4 cipher, a common Internet security system used by retailers like Newegg."

cancel ×

324 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Good advertising? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530425)

Hopefully this turns out to be good advertising for NewEgg - I know I'll be making my next computer purchase from them to help support them in fighting a patent troll.

Re:Good advertising? (5, Insightful)

Chameleon Man (1304729) | about 9 months ago | (#45530555)

Is there anywhere else you should buy computer parts from? Their hardware all seems to be competitively price, and their customer service is outstanding. My buddy bought a mouse at Best Buy that didn't work. When they didn't take it back, Newegg did and gave them a full refund.

Re:Good advertising? (3, Insightful)

cdl (902729) | about 9 months ago | (#45530569)

Ahh - did your friend tell Newegg that the mouse was bought at Best Buy? If so, props to Newegg for helping your friend out. If not, I think that's called fraud (and no props to your friend).

Re:Good advertising? (2)

hawguy (1600213) | about 9 months ago | (#45530625)

Is there anywhere else you should buy computer parts from? Their hardware all seems to be competitively price, and their customer service is outstanding. My buddy bought a mouse at Best Buy that didn't work. When they didn't take it back, Newegg did and gave them a full refund.

Lately, I've found that Amazon usually meets or beats Newegg's pricing for most things I buy, with free 2 day shipping (for Prime members). Even when NewEgg does offer free shipping, it's their "Standard 5 -7 days shipping" - I don't purchase enough things that Newegg carries to make it worth signing up for their $79/year "Shoprunner" service that provides 2 day shipping on many items.

Re:Good advertising? (3, Informative)

keytoe (91531) | about 9 months ago | (#45530701)

Lately, I've found that Amazon usually meets or beats Newegg's pricing for most things I buy, with free 2 day shipping (for Prime members).

This was when I stopped using Newegg as well - the moment my wife signed us up for prime. We actually did it for the video and kindle, but once you experience free shipping like that it's pretty hard to accept anything else.

Add in that they allow me to pay using my Discover card rewards right at checkout and it's a dangerous combo.

Well played, Amazon.

Re:Good advertising? (0, Troll)

n1ywb (555767) | about 9 months ago | (#45530753)

Of course not everything is on prime and if you compare the prime vs. non-prime price you will find that, no, the shipping isn't really free.

Also who the heck uses Discover cards?

Re:Good advertising? (2)

hawguy (1600213) | about 9 months ago | (#45530883)

Of course not everything is on prime and if you compare the prime vs. non-prime price you will find that, no, the shipping isn't really free.

Let's look at a few examples from Newegg's Pre-black-friday sale:

Samsung 10.1" tablet in white - $299 on NewEgg (free 5 day shipping), $299 on Amazon (Prime shipping)
Intel Core i5-3570K Ivy Bridge 3.4GHz - $199 on NewEgg (free shipping), $197.99 on Amazon (Prime)
ASUS RT-AC66U Dual-Band Wireless-AC1750 - $179.99 on NewEgg (free shipping), $179.99 on Amazon (Prime)

So Amazon is the same price or cheaper with faster shipping. Sure, the shipping may be built-in to the prime price, but I don't care if it matches the competitors.

Also who the heck uses Discover cards?

Discover offers some good rewards deals.

Re:Good advertising? (2)

Mordok-DestroyerOfWo (1000167) | about 9 months ago | (#45530919)

Not to detract from the larger issue, but my first credit card was Discover and it's still my primary, 15 years later. Their customer service is great, their call centers are in the United States, and I simply prefer dealing with them over Capital One or any of the other megabanks.

Re:Good advertising? (1)

jonnythan (79727) | about 9 months ago | (#45530923)

Almost everything on Amazon is Prime-eligible, and at a price lower than everyone else. Even car parts.

Re:Good advertising? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530949)

Why are you arguing semantics? They said it's cheaper than newegg, and even at that cheaper price it doesn't cost them any extra for shipping (whereas newegg often does). You're correct that Amazon may have the same item from sellers that trade off shipping cost for item price, but that has nothing to do with validity of their point.

Discover charges businesses more to accept it, but as a customer you generally get more cash back than competing cards. Plus, compared to hotel and airline benefits that many other cards give you, you don't have to deal with blackout dates and weird restrictions -- it's straightforward, you get cash back, and use it for whatever you want. It's a perfectly logical choice. I've found Discover is accepted more places then AmEx.

Re:Good advertising? (2)

chmod a+x mojo (965286) | about 9 months ago | (#45531093)

Don't forget cheap as dirt next day shipping, for the things I have used it on so far, being a prime member takes 1 day shipping from $14+ to like $1-3.

When taking that into account the prime membership pays for itself after a few purchases, plus you get your stuff quite a bit faster. Oh yeah, and you get free video services to boot.

Re:Good advertising? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530713)

But the tipping point is their willingness to take on patent trolls.

(I have one of their t-shirts)

Re:Good advertising? (1)

stdarg (456557) | about 9 months ago | (#45530747)

I've started comparing prices for each component at both sites.

Also check out camelcamelcamel.com and camelegg.com. Now we just need a site where you enter your build and it puts together order lists from newegg and amazon to optimize for price. Ideally it would also search for near substitutes (different brands of value ram for instance) and build your shopping cart for you.

Re:Good advertising? (2)

absurdhero (614828) | about 9 months ago | (#45530927)

Now we just need a site where you enter your build and it puts together order lists from newegg and amazon to optimize for price.

http://pcpartpicker.com/ [pcpartpicker.com] does exactly that!

Re:Good advertising? (1)

jonnythan (79727) | about 9 months ago | (#45530877)

Yup. I browse NewEgg because their products are meticulously tagged and organized, and their reviewers are by and large much more knowledgeable than those on Amazon.

But I almost always buy on Amazon. Because of Prime.

Re:Good advertising? (2)

lgw (121541) | about 9 months ago | (#45530937)

I don't care about the shipping cost, but I've found that Amazon often has better packaging. Newegg is awesome about returns for damaged goods, but still: better extra padding in the first place.

Re:Good advertising? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530901)

Newegg free shipping is better with shipping than Amazon free shipping (not prime). That 5-7 days has always been 2-3 for me, and Amazon the 5-8 days has always been 5-8 days.

Re:Good advertising? (5, Insightful)

larry bagina (561269) | about 9 months ago | (#45530941)

NewEgg stands up to patent trolls.

Amazon... well, one-click.

Re:Good advertising? (2)

Ben C. (2950903) | about 9 months ago | (#45530969)

Yeah but Amazon charges sales tax in my state and Newegg still doesn't. Plus you can get an indefinite free trial of Shoprunner if you dig around the internet hard enough.

Re:Good advertising? (1)

Villain (19081) | about 9 months ago | (#45530745)

I hope their RMA department has stopped intentionally bending pins in the CPU socket to avoid having to replace the boards for their customers. I'll never buy from them again.
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1694667 [hardforum.com]

Re:Good advertising? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530765)

Sometimes Amazon has stuff for like 4 dollars less, but their prices are different at different times of the day and sometimes (rarely) even when browsing their site with different browsers. Really, it's trust; I trust Newegg, I don't trust Amazon.

Re:Good advertising? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530867)

The same products can be found on Amazon, at similar prices. I personally favor Newegg as it's catered for us tinkerers, but when they're out of stock I'll use amazon. Amazon also have a better return policy, in that they don't give a fsck if you return something in the first month, you'll get all your money back with not shipping fees deducted. Unlike Newegg that can make you jump through various hoops.

Beyond Newegg and Amazon, there really is little competition in the US for PC parts. We should also tip our hats to Monoprice too, for their respective product line.

Re:Good advertising? (2)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | about 9 months ago | (#45530873)

fyi, do not EVER buy an 'open box' item from newegg.

you may think it goes thru some kind of sanity checking or testing but they DO NOT TEST. NOT EVER.

I got a bad ssd (someone must have done their own, (cough) testing of the ssd before returning it) and I got stuck with this dud. when I complained newegg told me they never test customer returns. I was shocked! and they did nothing for me since it was over 30 days before I found that the ssd was worn out.

I normally buy things from there, but this turned me off pretty strongly.

that, and their shipping of drives is highly questionable. lately, I've read reports of them denying customer returns due to 'dings' or dents on the drives; and likely it was during INITIAL shipping to the customer. so, not only can you not buy open-box items from eggie, you really should not buy drives from them, either.

I think they have gotton too big. customer service is now a 2nd thought with them.

too bad.

Re:Good advertising? (1)

bhcompy (1877290) | about 9 months ago | (#45531079)

Mwave, Microcenter, and Frys all have comparative pricing. Frys has shitty service and a shitty webstore, but they often have better pricing.

Re:Good advertising? (1)

Shakrai (717556) | about 9 months ago | (#45530571)

Newegg doesn't carry much that you can't find on Amazon for the same price, and Amazon has a more consumer-oriented return policy. 15% restocking fee for an unopened product? Fuck you Newegg, and the horse you rode in on....

Re:Good advertising? (4, Informative)

Smidge204 (605297) | about 9 months ago | (#45530719)

Amazon.com charges a restocking fee under exactly the same circumstances that Newegg does... except Amazon can hit you for 20%-50% of the item's price instead of just 15%.

That said, it's always worth shopping around - but I find Newegg pretty consistently has better prices, and lately they even have a price guarantee on some things.
=Smidge=

Re:Good advertising? (4, Interesting)

Shakrai (717556) | about 9 months ago | (#45531039)

Amazon.com charges a restocking fee under exactly the same circumstances that Newegg does

No they don't, unopened items returned within the return window are refunded in full, minus the return shipping cost if the return was a result of an error made by the customer. You only eat a percentage of the product if it's returned outside of the usual 30 day return window, which is certainly fair.

In Newegg's case, they attempted to tried to ding me 15% of an unopened $600 video card, despite their CSRs claim that they would waive the fee. The return was completely my fault, I ordered the wrong card, and was open about that fact during my communication with them. I initially reached out to them in the hope that they would simply recall the shipment, since I hadn't received it, but they claimed this was impossible. They also told me that I could not refuse delivery (an option with Amazon, FYI), because that would be a return without an RMA, and suggested I go through the standard RMA process. I asked what would happen, they said I would get a total refund and only be on the hook for return shipping, which was more than I expected (eating the S/H charges in both directions would have been fair, since the mistake was mine), but I assumed they were being nice since I had placed an order for the correct card prior to calling on the bad one.

Imagine my surprise when I got my credit card statement and found the restocking fee. Numerous phone calls ensued, wherein every single person that I talked to refused to honor the deal. Escalated to supervisors, who also refused to honor the deal, escalated again to people that never returned phone calls. Offered to provide a recording of the original call, but was told that it would be "irrelevant", because the CSR "exceeded his authority", as if that's my problem. I ultimately had to dispute the charge with my credit card company, and the only reason I prevailed there was because of the aforementioned recording.

The best part? A few weeks later I get an e-mail telling me that I'm prohibited from doing business with them, because of the chargeback. Their prerogative I suppose, but none of it would have happened if they had simply honored their CSRs original promise.

Re:Good advertising? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530741)

I ordered a mobile phone from Newegg that was supposed to be "new", and I what arrived was one that was obviously used (probably a return). It even had someone else's apps installed on it. Ridiculous. I left some negative reviews and the next time I logged into my newegg account it was suspended.

Re:Good advertising? (2)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about 9 months ago | (#45530631)

Hopefully this turns out to be good advertising for NewEgg - I know I'll be making my next computer purchase from them to help support them in fighting a patent troll.

Newegg follows a 'no protection money to trolls' policy generally. Plus, they ship fast and always seem to be within a few percent, plus/minus, of the going rate (aside from occasional retail loss leaders, or the 'you can get 20 USB cables for a dollar, on the slow boat from China' ebay deals). Microcenter FTW for retail; but they make a fairly compelling case for online purchases.

Re:Good advertising? (1)

cayce (189143) | about 9 months ago | (#45530939)

Would be better if they throw those 2 millions and change into a legal and appeal the resolution.

Worse thing that can happen is patent trolls getting precedent.

Well... (5, Insightful)

TheSwift (2714953) | about 9 months ago | (#45530435)

I need to buy a new desktop anyway. Newegg, my money's coming your way.

Re:Well... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530575)

Definitely in the market for a new laptop. I can't say this will sway me; but I'll take a look at what they've got...

shame (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530437)

any doubts that patents are ridiculous?

Re:shame (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | about 9 months ago | (#45530459)

The problem isn't just parents, it is also that we allow sociopaths to pass the bar exam.

Re:shame (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | about 9 months ago | (#45530533)

The problem isn't just parents

I agree. Teachers are unionized so they must be at fault somehow.

Re:shame (2)

lagomorpha2 (1376475) | about 9 months ago | (#45530535)

"The problem isn't just parents, it is also that we allow sociopaths to pass the bar exam."

I disagree. Parents aren't doing enough these days to keep their kids out of law school.

Re:shame (1)

hawguy (1600213) | about 9 months ago | (#45530541)

The problem isn't just parents, it is also that we allow sociopaths to pass the bar exam.

But can't we blame the parents for raising a sociopath?

Re:shame (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about 9 months ago | (#45530685)

The problem isn't just parents, it is also that we allow sociopaths to pass the bar exam.

But can't we blame the parents for raising a sociopath?

I'm not a fancy psych expert; but my understanding was that sociopathy is born, not made, though the distinction between the dumb, locally dangerous sociopaths(who will probably kill somebody, maybe more than one; but then end up in prison or going down in a hail of bullets) and the smart, systemically dangerous ones (who would never do anything so crass; and are alarmingly likely to worm their way into positions of influence, may be environmental.

Re:shame (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45531041)

The smart, systematically dangerous ones, by definition, are psychopaths - not sociopaths.

http://www.helpingpsychology.com/sociopath-vs-psychopath-whats-the-difference

Stupid judge/jury. (3, Informative)

JustNiz (692889) | about 9 months ago | (#45530455)

Trolls 1, good guys 0.
Stupid judge/jury.

At least it sounds like NewEgg will take it higher.

Re:Stupid judge/jury. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530561)

As much as I hate patent trolls, I'm not going to shed a tear for NewEgg. I've had nothing but bad experiences with them recently. They were good up until about 4yrs ago when they started to become a second rate Amazon.

Re:Stupid judge/jury. (1)

PortHaven (242123) | about 9 months ago | (#45530793)

I have to agree that Newegg has gone down hill. But this was still a wrong decision.

Re:Stupid judge/jury. (4, Insightful)

cdl (902729) | about 9 months ago | (#45530657)

We can fight these stupid decisions coming out of east Texas one by one, or we could be smarter about it. We can try for patent reform, but the $$ involved, they will probably find a way around that as well. How about we start a PR fund with the goal of flooding the East Texas jury pool (buy TV/Radio/Newspaper/Internet in that geography) explaining why this is bad to the people that will be sitting in the jury box. Explain that it's actually killing small, successful companies, and only enriching the trolls/lawyers who actually did nothing. Call it carpetbagging - should resonate with Texans.

Re: Stupid judge/jury. (4, Insightful)

Scowler (667000) | about 9 months ago | (#45530699)

Playing devil's advocate here... Why is this result some failure of the judge/jury of this case? Like it or not, this patent has previously been granted by the patent office. Jurors and judges don't get to invalidate patent claims because of some flaky idea of who is trolling who. Rather, they have to follow a more or less established legal process, regardless the side they may otherwise be rooting for. You want a "Bad Guy" for this event? Blame Congress, as current law incentivizes patent reviewers to accept questionable patent applications, and the number of years granted to these patents are too many.

Re: Stupid judge/jury. (5, Insightful)

gstoddart (321705) | about 9 months ago | (#45530733)

Playing devil's advocate here... Why is this result some failure of the judge/jury of this case?

When the guy who invented public key encryption tells you that the basis of the patent had been around for years, that is a failure of the jury in this case.

At this point, I think people should just be suing the USPTO for lousy patents which should never have been granted in the first place.

Re: Stupid judge/jury. (2)

JustNiz (692889) | about 9 months ago | (#45530871)

Actually I've often wondered why people dont sue the USPTO for that or something similar.
I read somewhere that in the US if you sue the police and win, you cant get legal costs awarded too, so consequently not may people risk suing the police.
Is it the same with any government agency? (i.e. including the USPTO?)

Re: Stupid judge/jury. (5, Informative)

jandrese (485) | about 9 months ago | (#45530951)

The most amazing thing is that TQP's argument against Diffie involved them finding potential prior art to show that Diffie wasn't the inventor of public key cryptography. Even if this argument succeeded, then it should have put an even bigger nail in their coffin since it would show even more prior art for the patent.

This really was the worst kind of patent too. So I see you're doing asymmetric crypto for key transfer...but ah ha, I got a patent for asymmetric crypto for key transfer using RC4! Checkmate! Like wow, you applied the most common (at the time) algorithm to a system that kind of resembles a SSL connection, except that it's with modems and came a few years after the big Diffie-Helmann paper.

And of course they aren't suing the people who made the SSL offload appliances that got NewEgg into trouble, they're suing all of their customers, for using the thing with the default settings. And they're calling it willful infringement because they didn't go an explicitly disable the RC4 feature to comply with a patent they knew nothing about.

Re: Stupid judge/jury. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530997)

At this point, I think people should just be suing the USPTO for lousy patents which should never have been granted in the first place.

The definition of "lousy patents which should never have been granted in the first place" would quickly become "all the patents my big powerful company wants to use without paying for".

Re:Stupid judge/jury. (1)

gmuslera (3436) | about 9 months ago | (#45530881)

Hanlon's Razor should take priority. But letting patent trolls win on basic encryption technology could be something intended by the government, a first step outlawing strong encryption outside their control everywhere.

It will be appealed (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530467)

We'll see what happens in the circuit courts. East Texas is a joke and gets overturned on appeal frequently.

Re:It will be appealed (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530591)

Yeah. [setexasrecord.com] ...

not over yet (1)

beckett (27524) | about 9 months ago | (#45530469)

guaranteed if Newegg is taking such a strong position vs. patent trolls, this is not over by a long shot.

expect appeals for years to come.

Oh really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530471)

They may think they've won this round, but little does TQP know that I have a patent on the filing of frivolous patent lawsuits. TQP can expect to hear from my lawyers soon.

Re:Oh really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530953)

Unfortunately, you will need to wait until NewEgg wins the appeal. Until then, TQP's case can't be called frivolous by the courts since they won.

I hate lawyers. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530473)

I hate lawyers. They are a cancer on America.

First... (0)

jddeluxe (965655) | about 9 months ago | (#45530503)

...let's kill all the lawyers...

Re:First... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530579)

...let's kill all the lawyers...

First, they came for the lawyers, and I said nothing.

After that we all lived happily ever after.

The End :-)

Re:First... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530603)

Lawyers only do what their clients tell them and no more.

Re:First... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530697)

As do hit-men.

SSL? (2)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about 9 months ago | (#45530519)

How can that company not be a patent troll?

Re:SSL? (4, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about 9 months ago | (#45530721)

What is somewhat surprising is that Newegg had, as expert witness, Whitfield Diffie, as in 'Diffie-Hellman' Diffie. I didn't even know that it was possible to lose an assymetric-key encryption related case with him on your side, especially against nobody in particular.

Re:SSL? (2)

spottedkangaroo (451692) | about 9 months ago | (#45530847)

It's a quibble, but I'm pretty sure it's symmetric. You use DH to establish a shared secret (the same on both sides). The only assymetric part of ssl is the certificates that are used to prevent man in the middle... I'd hardly call X509 ssl, just a necessary evil (or is it, convergence.io seems dead).

Jews Sue (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530531)

the guys name should of tipped you off, parasitic behaviour is what they do, why do you think every society in the last 2000 years have expelled and hated them ?

troublemakers, nothing good will come of them

Re:Jews Sue (0)

cdl (902729) | about 9 months ago | (#45530751)

Can someone with moderator points PLEASE downmod "Jews Sue" one as flamebait? A hint for the "Jews Sue" author - if you want to slag someone, at least man up when you do it, and put your name on it. If not, you're just a lame, scared little boy/girl. I have no problems with people speaking their mind (if they have one), but I can't abide a coward slagging someone and not being willing to own up to the slag.

Re:Jews Sue (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530907)

So your problem is that this is an inflammatory remark, not that it's true.

Time to give Texas back to Mexico (1)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | about 9 months ago | (#45530539)

Bonus: I get three passports then.

Marshall TX (1)

Arancaytar (966377) | about 9 months ago | (#45530559)

aka Patent Troll Capital.

Surely Newegg is going to appeal this idiocy?

One more reason to move away from RC4 (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530583)

That's one more reason to stop using RC4, which isn't secure anymore when used with SSL/TLS, such that Microsoft is moving it out of IE11 [technet.com] .

theres a joke in here somewhere... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530593)

"a company owned by patent enforcement expert Erich Spangenberg"

Patent enforcement expert? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530605)

That's putting it charitably, to say the least.

What's that I smell? (1)

erroneus (253617) | about 9 months ago | (#45530607)

Is it an appeal? Oh yes it is. These ass-clowns who think they have patents on the internet haven't yet faced the wrath of slashdot's anti-patent group of extremely knowledgeable and resourceful people.

I suspect a few people here with a little time on their hands will be able to prior-art their way to having the patent completely invalidated.

Re:What's that I smell? (2)

InsightfulPlusTwo (3416699) | about 9 months ago | (#45530703)

Yes, thank goodness all of us random Internet guys will be able to immediately do what Whitfield Diffie, the inventor of cryptography, failed to do. What would the Internet do without Slashdot?

Re:What's that I smell? (1)

erroneus (253617) | about 9 months ago | (#45530889)

You would be surprised. Appalled even.

Re:What's that I smell? (1)

InsightfulPlusTwo (3416699) | about 9 months ago | (#45530921)

Perhaps. But in any case, a simple change of venue out of Texas when they make their appeal may be all they need to win this one. Best of luck to New Egg!

Stealing math from the public (1)

Adrian Lopez (2615) | about 9 months ago | (#45530611)

Something's rotten in the state of Texas.

Diffie was awesome (5, Informative)

Gothmolly (148874) | about 9 months ago | (#45530615)

"And how is it that you're familiar with public key encryption?"

"I invented it."

Re:Diffie was awesome (1)

sl4shd0rk (755837) | about 9 months ago | (#45530709)

"I invented it."

Not enough for the jurors, apparently.

Re:Diffie was awesome (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530979)

Let's stop this jury are morons myth. The judges gives the jury a list of very specific questions to answer in these cases, taking 2-5 hours. It's not like 12 Angry Men, where people debate what they're heard and sway opinions.

The judge controls the entire jury thought process and has clearly spent a long time crafting the question list beforehand. Being an expert at law, they have already determined the result and knew precisely how to ensure their verdict is the one reached, but they still need to go through the proletarians to reinforce his chosen result.

I've been on jury duty in a bullshit patent suit, and despite the obvious sane result, the judge's contrived question list ensures you cannot come up with any result other than what (s)he has already determined. There is no "let's discuss this" based on what was presented. Any jury not doing so will be kicked out and the trial starts from fresh.

The massive issue here is that this is all behind the scenes, none of it is allowed to become part of the public record, hence posting AC.

Jury Nullification (1)

roman_mir (125474) | about 9 months ago | (#45531071)

Which is why the jury should always nullify laws in the courtroom.

Re:Diffie was awesome (2)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | about 9 months ago | (#45530739)

"I invented it."

That only has meaning if the jury is already informed. Assuming this jury is like most, all they've got is one guy saying "I invented it" compared to the patent being disputed which essentially says the same thing about another guy.

Maybe there was more to it, like spelling out the patents he was awarded for PKE (if there were any) or journal articles he wrote about it. That sort of thing. But if there wasn't a lot of effort put in to establish his credibility beyond his own words on the stand, then I can see how a jury would minimize what he said and come up with the kind of ruling they did.

Re:Diffie was awesome (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530887)

If you have Whitfield Diffie of Diffie-fucking-Hellman fame, whose work you use every single time you shop or bank online, testifying in front of you, and you dismiss him as a poser, consider yourself a failure.

Re:Diffie was awesome (4, Insightful)

jandrese (485) | about 9 months ago | (#45531023)

NewEgg's lawyers spent a fair bit of time proving Diffie's claim. They had a textbook, his original paper, and he gave a very informative talk about the early days of public key crypto. I suspect what happened here is that they took TQP's argument to heart that said TQP has a piece of paper that says they own it, so the law says the must find in favor of TQP, despite whatever feelings the jurors might have on the issue.

TQP managed to make the trial about "Did Newegg infringe on this patent?", not "Is this a bad patent that should be overturned?" In that case, the answer is probably a yes.

Re:Diffie was awesome (1)

Forever Wondering (2506940) | about 9 months ago | (#45530859)

I still have my original copy of the IEEE journal paper that I clipped in the 1970's. It stood out as a landmark paper then. About 15 years ago, I was at a technical talk and was able to get Martin Hellman to autograph it.

Re:Diffie was awesome (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530925)

He didn't it was invented at GCHQ in 1973.

I"m not sure how this patent is even relevant (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530653)

"In accordance with the invention, to permit the two stations to communicate, each supplied in advance with a random number seed value which exclusively determines the numerical content of the sequence of numeric values generated by each of the two pseudo-random generators."

I don't think SSL requires that both sides use the same prandom function, much less get a seed in advance, so how does SSL infringe again?

Re:I"m not sure how this patent is even relevant (1)

jcochran (309950) | about 9 months ago | (#45530849)

I don't believe that SSL infringes at all. However, RC4 is frequently used as a PRNG (after all, one of it's biggest advantages is to be used as a stream of 'random' numbers to be exclusive ored with the clear text to create the cyphertext which in turn can be xored with an identical stream of bytes at the other end to decrypt. This allows encryption to byte boundaries and doesn't require blocks of 8 bytes to be sent per transmission.) Perhaps that secondary use of RC4 along with the time honored practice of "baffle with bullshit" that's all too commonly used in the legal system managed to delude the jury into making the judgement they did.
   

Newegg made its name on appeals (5, Informative)

AnalogDiehard (199128) | about 9 months ago | (#45530673)

Newegg lost the trial but has prevailed on appeal with past cases against patent trolls. [arstechnica.com] Newegg had budgeted its legal warchest to include appeal, so the fight ain't over yet.

Re:Newegg made its name on appeals (2)

jandrese (485) | about 9 months ago | (#45530857)

It's important to remember that East Texas almost invariably sides with the NPE. That's why most of these suits are brought up in East Texas.

Retailers (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530675)

a common Internet security system used by retailers like Newegg

Perhaps the retailers should make a gentleman's agreement to stop shipping to Marshall, TX.

Another proof of the old proverb (0)

Opportunist (166417) | about 9 months ago | (#45530707)

Those who can, do.

Those who can't, sue.

goodby america (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530725)

It was nice to have you in the world as a developed country but it fills me with pain that you are the leader -a thing you have a hang off- into the dark middle age:

* torture
* repression of free speak
* extortion with the help of lawyers
* killing innocent people with their drone war
* big brothering in a way that "1984" seems a little unabitious
* emphasing on belief instead of knowledge in teaching

The list is much longer but i am to saddned to continue over here...

trolling...of course not (1)

fluffythedestroyer (2586259) | about 9 months ago | (#45530743)

Just a bit of research and comon sense tells me TQP is a small company (run by 2 persons by the way) is a big patent troll. On top of that, almost every commercial website uses those protocols, how many times he's going to court with this.. omfg, really ?

Rather stupid verdict (1)

jcochran (309950) | about 9 months ago | (#45530779)

I have no idea how in the world anyone with a clue can claim that this patent and SSL using RC4 have anything to do with each other. I just took at look at the linked patent and in a nutshell, what it does is have both parties switch encryption keys multiple times during a transmission by having both parties have identically configured pseudo random number generators which supply the encryption keys (this means that a limited amount of the transmission is encrypted with the same key before the key gets changed). Effectively this simply transfers the overall security of the system to the security of the PRNG, but it doesn't solve the problem of the initial key transfer/generation. I really hope that Newegg appeals this stupid ruling.

I love newegg. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530853)

They ate a $900 loss once for me when the mfg was useless. and crap.

Newegg has my business forever. (until they screw me over in a major way).

Hopefully never.

Xmas comming. Lets go buy something at newegg!

Just shot Erich Spangenberg in the head (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45530865)

Just shot Erich Spangenberg in the head.
That should settle it.

Is it possible that patents are an undue burden? (5, Insightful)

Press2ToContinue (2424598) | about 9 months ago | (#45530957)

As a developer of original software products, I consider it impossible - just my opinion - to determine if any software I create infringes on existing patents. There are usually thousands and often tens of thousands of ideas, algorithms and design approaches in a product that would need to be checked, and patents are so wordy that the time it would take to determine if there was infringement would always far exceed the time it takes to make the product. This seems to me to pose an undue burden, and is therefore unconstitutional?

Does anyone have any thoughts on this?

not worried (1)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about 9 months ago | (#45530973)

Annual Sales

Approximately $2.5 billion in 2010

http://www.newegg.com/Info/FactSheet.aspx [newegg.com]

I'm sure this will really hurt their bottom line. lol
I'm surprised Newegg doesn't just buy this company and fire the entire staff with extreme prejudice.

I do a lot of business with newegg. As a hobby I run a small "custom computer" business. I basically started out building computers for my familly and friends... and then it move on to "extended family and friends" and now I do between $10k and $20k in business with them per year. I don't make any profit, I just like doing it and I get lots of freebies as a result.

Newegg is by far the best retailer I've worked with. I do all of my business with them now. They even let me return downloadable software once because it wouldn't install correctly. I've returned CPUs after they were installed! Granted, they give me more leeway because I do so much business with them but they really do have decent policies and try their best to rectify any issues I have with them. Dell? HP? Crutchfield? Yea, they can all burn in hell.

Arial !??? (0)

BlindRobin (768267) | about 9 months ago | (#45531089)

I thought all documents presented in court were required to be in comic sans....

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>