Pure Storage buys HUNDREDS of patents from IBM in lawfare protection deal Pure Storage, the fairly rich all-flash array startup, has spent some of its cash to buy more than a hundred storage patents from IBM and the two have signed a cross-licensing agreement. Pure’s legal VP, Joe FitzGerald, talked of how “this transaction significantly increases the number of Pure Storage’s patents, creating a …
The Patent lawyers decaying bodies (when consigned to the ocea) will have to sit on top of those of the 'Lawyers who become Politicians'. After all it is the Politicians who make the laws that are ironically only for the benefit of their Lawyer Bretheren.
If I were PM/President, I'd put a percentage cap on the number of Lawyers who could be elected to office. That way I'd hope that some semblance of common sence might return to law making. I'd also limit those who did things like Politics and Economics at Uni and then became a researcher for an MP before standing themselves. These people need to get a life and a job in the real world for a few years. Just as bad as the lawyers IMHO.
Yeah, I know this is the impossible dream but you have to dream a bit don't you?
I agree with u . Cross license should be sufficient . I suspect that there is more behind this action and reason for announcing this. Very strange. The troll may be right in that ibm found pure to violate an ibm license . Which maybe pure n ibm negotiated to this announced agreement to state purchased and xlicense .If so then Win win and no bad press for pure like the EMC suit. Ibm more on the high moral ground than pure. That is , if this was the scenario, then to be fair , pure may not have realized the violation, ibm caught it, discussed w pure, pure n ibm negotiated , ibm not intend to hurt pure biz opt and agreed to the press releases? Maybe?
Otherwise the press release is strange and not making sense:
chris doesnt have the other Ibm press release on pure patent deal which quotes ibm patent lawyer implying pure patent deal as "licensed access." Does not say purchased.
"by licensing access to our extensive patent portfolio IBM's extensive R&D investment an...."
Patents Purchased by pure would mean ibm would never foresee implementing them in ibm solutions. Pure states that the patents have not been implemented and pure doesnt plan to Implement?
Chris quotes Scott that "the vast majority of which are unlicensed by today’s big storage vendors.”
"We pledge that we will not make first use of these patents, but rather use this IP only to defend against aggression from those competitors "
-------
Anyone ever heard of this kind done in the history of technology.
...but I don't think they really expect it to specifically protect them from EMC where EMC has provided evidence that data was removed from their internal systems by staffers who then left for Pure? That is not a matter of IP infringement, but rather a matter of IP theft (not yet proven in court AFAIK).
I don't think this article is telling the full story, as indicated by Neo Darwin above. IBM is saying something slightly different than Pure about the patents (licensed to Pure, rather than owned by Pure). Pure may have been forced to do so by IBM after violating a patent, but is now protected by IBM's patent muscle in case anyone decides to go after Pure.
There is a special layer of hell reserved for patent lawyers.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
