The Paul Allen against the World case is moving forward. In fact, faster than the parties probably expected. There was a stipulation to extend time to complete initial disclosures from November 1 to two weeks past whenever the claims were clearer, either through an amended complaint or two weeks after infringement contentions are due. But the judge denied it. And he goes on to remind the parties that the date for filing the joint status report is November 8.
The strange part is, I don't see how the parties can comply when
Allen's complaint is so vague. Even Gene Quinn, who thinks the sun rises and sets on patents,
said it was "a complaint without any substantive information and naked recitation of a variety of patents that have 'one or more' unspecified claims being infringed for unspecified reasons." How do the defendants provide initial disclosures to that? Plus Google has
an undecided motion seeking to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim.
Maybe the judge found the complaint a little annoying too, and so he intends to punish the plaintiff by insisting on the schedule even though nobody knows what the claims specifically are? Dream on. This is the style, Quinn wrote, that trolls favor, and courts don't seem to ever clip their wings. Here's what
initial disclosures are.
Everything is happening on November 8, SCO's
bankruptcy hearing where they have to reveal the highest bidder, if any, for their assets, this scheduled deadline, and the
EFF Pioneer Awards ceremony. Good thing Groklaw is a group effort.
More...
