In #ScheduleA copyright case (before Judge Kennelly) a group of defendants accuses the plaintiff of all kinds of misconduct, including bad faith withholding of TRO documents and judge shopping:
The test for design patent infringement asks whether the accused product has the same shape. NOT whether it embodies the same idea or larger design concept.
The "thousands of existing design patents are now at risk!" critique is not nearly as damning as some lawyers seem to think it is. That's what happens whenever the law changes. Move on.
TFW a judge describes AIPLA, INTA and that weird Charles Mauro outfit as "organizations with a primary interest in the stability and clarity of the law."
For those who aren't familiar: These aren't neutral groups. They are promoting their own economic interests. Which is fine. As long as you understand that.
@rticks It's basically a shakedown scheme. Some of the targets may actually be infringers. But not necessarily. And even when/if they are, these plaintiffs appear to be demanding more (sometimes, much more) than the amount of damages they could recover in regular litigation.