A US Texas federal judge dismisses NetSoc LLC patent against Match Group (MTCH)

https://patents.justia.com/patent/9978107
https://www.docketalarm.com/cases/PTAB/IPR2019-01165/Inter_Partes_Review_of_U.S._Pat._9978107/06-10-2019-Board/Notice_of_Filing_Date_Accorded_to_Petition-5-Notice_of_Accord_Filing_Date/
https://www.docketalarm.com/cases/PTAB/IPR2019-01165/Inter_Partes_Review_of_U.S._Pat._9978107/
https://www.law360.com/ip/articles/1181051/match-fends-off-life-issues-infringement-suit

Match Group LLC Faces 2nd Infringement Suit Over 'Life Issues' Patent
https://onlinedatingsoundbarrier.blogspot.com/2018/07/match-group-llc-faces-2nd-infringement.html

SA article: Match earnings call: Plans for 2H deceleration, mentions tech patent
https://onlinedatingsoundbarrier.blogspot.com/2018/02/sa-article-match-earnings-call-plans.html

"Patent Troll Takes Aim At iDating Industry" talking about the U.S. Patent No. 5,623,660 issued April, 1997.
http://onlinedatingsoundbarrier.blogspot.com.ar/2014/01/a-patent-issue-from-2007.html

about article: Stupid Patent of the Month: Facebook
https://onlinedatingsoundbarrier.blogspot.com/2018/05/about-article-stupid-patent-of-month.html

  Patent troll defeated by Spark Networks.
http://onlinedatingsoundbarrier.blogspot.com.ar/2017/08/patent-troll-defeated-by-spark-networks.html

Patent troll defeated by Spark Networks.

https://delawareintellectualproperty.foxrothschild.com/2017/08/articles/patents/patent-infringement/judge-sleet-finds-independent-claims-of-patents-in-suit-invalid-and-grants-defendants-motion-to-dismiss-patent-infringement-action/
https://delawareintellectualproperty.foxrothschild.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2017/08/Jedi-Tech-Opinion-August-3-2017.pdf
http://investor.spark.net/static-files/1a6bba84-066d-4861-9329-9ec58dfdd4fe

a NEW Silly Patent Litigation in the Online Dating Industry
http://onlinedatingsoundbarrier.blogspot.com.ar/2016/08/a-new-silly-patent-litigation-in-online.html

Report: Inventions and Patents via Financial Times
http://onlinedatingsoundbarrier.blogspot.com.ar/2016/06/report-inventions-and-patents-via.html

another US stupid patent for the Online Dating Industry!

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/9355358.pdf

Please see:
Report: Inventions and Patents via Financial Times
http://onlinedatingsoundbarrier.blogspot.com.ar/2016/06/report-inventions-and-patents-via.html
A patent issue from 2007 ?
http://onlinedatingsoundbarrier.blogspot.com.ar/2014/01/a-patent-issue-from-2007.html




See How LIFEPROJECT METHOD calculates similarity between quantized patterns using an adapted quantum mechanics math equation same as "Teller Ulam design".  
http://onlinedatingsoundbarrier.blogspot.com.ar/2012/07/quantifying-online-dating-revolution.html

LIFEPROJECT METHOD is like the "Teller Ulam design" for the Online Dating Industry.
In this case 100 times more powerful than actual matching algorithms.
 
Not 100% better, 100 TIMES better
http://onlinedatingsoundbarrier.blogspot.com.ar/2014/05/lifeproject-method-versus-eharmony.html   

The idea of a thermonuclear fusion bomb ignited by a smaller fission bomb was first proposed by Enrico Fermi to his colleague Edward Teller in 1941 at the start of what would become the Manhattan Project.
Other prominent scientists openly recommended building nuclear bombs more powerful than the standard pure-fission model. Their assumption was that critical mass considerations would limit the potential size of fission explosions, but that a fusion explosion could be as large as its supply of fuel, which has no critical mass limit.
In January 1951, Edward Teller and Stanislaw Ulam invented radiation-powered ablation-drive implosion.
The Teller–Ulam design is the nuclear weapon design concept used in most of the world's multi-megaton-range thermonuclear weapons;  a 1,000 times more powerful than Hiroshima's Little Boy. In most applications the bulk of its destructive energy comes from uranium fission, not hydrogen/deuterium/tritium fusion!
 
Its essential features, which officially remained secret for nearly three decades, are:
1) separation of stages into a triggering "primary" explosive and a much more powerful "secondary" explosive
2) compression of the secondary by X-rays coming from nuclear fission in the primary, a process called the "radiation implosion" of the secondary,
3) heating of the secondary, after cold compression, by a second fission explosion inside the secondary.

Report: Inventions and Patents via Financial Times

http://www.ft.com/reports/inventions-patents

Patenting has never been more popular. Applications have reached record levels at the world’s main patent offices — fuelled by a sustained increase in applications from Asia. Patent filings by Chinese companies outside their home country have risen 30-fold so far this century

Update from
FT reports: Inventions and Patents
http://onlinedatingsoundbarrier.blogspot.com.ar/2015/06/ft-reports-inventions-and-patents.html


Please remember:

Erick Schonfeld had written last 2011 an interesting article about "The Terrible Cost Of Patents" at TechCrunch.

* We are in the middle of a patent bubble. 
* Technology companies are spending billions of dollars on assets which they need primarily to defend themselves against the rising tide of patent litigation, they won't invest in new products, new jobs, new facilities or other economically productive activities. And by and large, they will not use those patents to create new products.
* What you and I might consider an improvement, a patent lawyer might consider infringement. 
* Patents were originally conceived to protect inventors—people and companies who contribute to the advancement of society by creating new products. But in the past decade, something went horribly wrong. Patents are increasingly became nothing more than financial and legal weapons, to be amassed in portfolios by "non-practicing entities" (i.e. patent trolls) and used to extort protection money from economically productive companies.

Financial Times article "Patent case could shift power balance in tech industry"

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c8ebe298-dca3-11e4-a6f7-00144feab7de.html#axzz3WhQerpah
by Richard Waters in San Francisco

....

The dispute centres on so-called standard-essential patents, which cover technology that is included in industry-wide technology standards. Since others have to use the technology if they want their own products to meet an industry standard, the companies that submit their patents for approval by standards bodies are required to license them out on “reasonable and non-discriminatory”, or RAND, terms.

Microsoft sued Motorola after the handset maker asked for 2.25 per cent of the final product price for use of several of its patents that are included in standards for WiFi and video compression technology. Microsoft said the demand would have cost it $4bn a year. Judge James Robart, in a federal court in Seattle, laid out a different method for calculating the royalties that would instead cost Microsoft less than $2m a year.

If upheld, Judge Robart’s approach could tilt the balance of power in negotiations away from companies that own large portfolios of commonly used patents and instead favour those — like Microsoft or Apple — whose businesses are based more on implementing technology standards in their products.
......
“The litigation set bad policy by encouraging parties to run to court rather than negotiate,” said David Balto, a former chief of competition policy at the Federal Trade Commission.

Some in the tech industry also argue that, if the ruling stands, companies will not be as willing to allow their technology to be included in industry standards, since it would rob them of much of their negotiating leverage.

The calculation method that Judge Robarts came up with “would conceivably apply to lower the reasonable royalty available to every single [standard-essential patent]”, the American Intellectual Property Law Association wrote in an amicus brief to the court.

Companies who have joined the opposition to the ruling include Qualcomm, many of whose patents cover mobile communications technologies that have been adopted in industry standards. The calculation method is a “one-sided directive that advances only implementers’ interests in obtaining licences at the lowest possible cost,” it said in a court filing supporting Motorola’s position.


Please see:
A patent issue from 2007 ?
http://onlinedatingsoundbarrier.blogspot.com.ar/2014/01/a-patent-issue-from-2007.html

Another rubbish patent for the Online Dating Industry

Title: ONLINE DATING DANGER PREVENTION SYSTEM
Document Type and Number:  United States Patent Application 20140365528 Kind Code: A1
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2014/0365528.html

Please read also:
A patent issue from 2007 ?
http://onlinedatingsoundbarrier.blogspot.com.ar/2014/01/a-patent-issue-from-2007.html

The Terrible Cost Of Patents
http://onlinedatingsoundbarrier.blogspot.com.ar/2011/08/terrible-cost-of-patents.html

A patent issue from 2007 ?

Last year I had written the article "Patents for the Online Dating Industry" and other posts like
NEW patent: System and Method for Identifying Other Users After a Termination of a Relationship
How to copycat eHarmony, 13+ years old obsolete site.
The Terrible Cost Of Patents
 * We are in the middle of a patent bubble.
* Technology companies are spending billions of dollars on assets which they need primarily to defend themselves against the rising tide of patent litigation, they won't invest in new products, new jobs, new facilities or other economically productive activities. And by and large, they will not use those patents to create new products.
* What you and I might consider an improvement, a patent lawyer might consider infringement.
* Patents were originally conceived to protect inventors—people and companies who contribute to the advancement of society by creating new products. But in the past decade, something went horribly wrong. Patents are increasingly became nothing more than financial and legal weapons, to be amassed in portfolios by "non-practicing entities" (i.e. patent trolls) and used to extort protection money from economically productive companies.

 
Now OPW writes about "Patent Troll Takes Aim At iDating Industry" talking about the U.S. Patent No. 5,623,660 issued April, 1997.
I thought that issue was solved during 2007, in the article "Suit Says eHarmony, Others Breached Patent" and the post "Goodbye dating patents." from the POF owners.

NEW patent: System and Method for Identifying Other Users After a Termination of a Relationship

System and Method for Identifying Other Users After a Termination of a Relationship
Publication number    US20130262984 A1
Publication type    Application
Application number    US 13/854,047
Publication date    Oct 3, 2013
Filing date    Mar 29, 2013

Astonished to see how, instead of innovating, they can patent stupidities for the Online Dating Industry. Lack Of Innovation & Decadence can summarize the Online Dating Industry since years. 
C level executives are cooking barbecues under the water (selling smoke) and not paying attention to latest research from Academics which could be beneficial for the Online Dating Industry. 
 
With less than USD10 Million you can copycat eHarmony
or
 innovate and revolutionize the Online Dating Industry, killing those old & obsolete sites forever.

The Terrible Cost Of Patents

Erick Schonfeld had written an interesting article about "The Terrible Cost Of Patents" at TechCrunch.

* We are in the middle of a patent bubble.
* Technology companies are spending billions of dollars on assets which they need primarily to defend themselves against the rising tide of patent litigation, they won't invest in new products, new jobs, new facilities or other economically productive activities. And by and large, they will not use those patents to create new products.
* What you and I might consider an improvement, a patent lawyer might consider infringement.
* Patents were originally conceived to protect inventors—people and companies who contribute to the advancement of society by creating new products. But in the past decade, something went horribly wrong. Patents are increasingly became nothing more than financial and legal weapons, to be amassed in portfolios by "non-practicing entities" (i.e. patent trolls) and used to extort protection money from economically productive companies.

More info from PricewaterhouseCoopers full pdf study "Patent litigation trends 1995-2009 and the impact of recent court decisions on damages."