Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

Starting from 1 August, movie-goers in <keyword id="13126" type="LOCATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Maharashtra">Maharashtra</keyword> will have the option to opt-out of buying overpriced items at snack counters in movie theatres. The state government today (13 July) made the announcement that movie <keyword id="6282" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="theatre">theatre</keyword>s will no longer be able to forbid ‘outside food’. It has also decided to meet with theatre owners and review and reduce the current prices of food served. The Food Supplies Minister, Ravindra Chavan made this announcement at the <keyword id="4072" type="LOCATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Nagpur">Nagpur</keyword> Assembly in response to a query raised by opposition leader Dhananjay Munde on whether outside food was permitted inside theatres. The validity of the rule that prohibits outside food in theatres was earlier contested by Jainendra Baxi, who filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) at the <keyword id="48485" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Bombay-high-court">Bombay High Court</keyword> in <a href="https://scroll.in/latest/886420/maharashtra-movie-goers-can-carry-food-items-inside-theatres-from-august-1-says-government">January</a>. During the hearing in April, Baxi’s counsel Aditya Pratap raised a particularly interesting point that Maharashtra Cinemas (Regulation) Rules do not permit hawking and selling of food inside theatres. A rule that is clearly being flouted by theatre owners. The lawyer also pointed out that apart from the price, the rule prohibiting outside food affects senior citizens who have dietary restrictions and cannot stomach the "the junk food that the food stalls in the theatres sell." And while the case is still to be settled, the High Court did acknowledge the problem and opined that prices should ideally be brought down and if at all theatres insist on banning food in halls, then food should not be sold and served by theatre vendors either. To this, the Maharashtra government had said that it will soon frame a policy to address this issue after taking into account the suggestions submitted by the petitioner and the Multiplex Owners’ Association (MOA). Theatre owners, however, have unapologetically acknowledged that their entire business model is heavily reliant on the sale of snacks and beverages and not so much on the actual movie tickets which constitutes only 25% of their profits. In fact, Yogesh Raizada, corporate head, Wave Cinemas told the <a href="https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/after-bombay-hc-pulls-up-multiplexes-for-exorbitant-fb-prices-cinemas-and-moviegoers-debate/articleshow/63644450.cms">Times of India</a> that if theatres were to allow outside food it would affect their margins “much more than any film flopping.” Photo by: <a href="https://unsplash.com/photos/AEeoY_aqvNk?utm_source=unsplash&amp;utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_content=creditCopyText">Christian Wiediger</a> on <a href="https://unsplash.com/collections/481862/the-quizmasters?utm_source=unsplash&amp;utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_content=creditCopyText">Unsplash</a>.

Movie-goers in Maharashtra will soon be able to take their own food into theatres

The honourable Supreme Court has hinted that it could disallow <keyword id="102342" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="100" keywordseo="Public-Interest-Litigations">public interest litigations</keyword> (PILs) that involve commercial interests so that proxy corporate wars from can be prevented in the court. 
 
In the past, PILs have resulted in historic court orders that left considerable business impacts, for example group cancellation of telecom spectrum and coal block allocations. 
 After it disallows commercial interest PILs, the court might restrict its dealing to selective PILs, which would be selected after a rigorous scrutiny process. The decision was hinted at by a three-judge bench, including Chief Justice TS Thakur and Justices AK Sikri and R Banumathi. The bench was hearing a petition on the acquisition of <keyword id="2285630" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="100" keywordseo="Infotel-Telecom">Infotel Telecom</keyword> by Reliance Industries. 
 
"In the next phase of development (in PILs), we must ensure that that the process is not abused, only used in the fittest of cases. It must be an institutional mechanism," Justice Thakur told ET. 
 
He further suggested that a credible interface between the judicial process and the civil society is needed. 
 "How do we prevent misuse of the judicial process to settle scores, commercial rivalries," the CJI asked <keyword id="6368850" type="PERSON" weightage="100" keywordseo="Prashant-Bhushan">Prashant Bhushan</keyword>, the advocate for the petitioner, NGO Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL). 
 
"You must satisfy us that the information, that your process of verifying information which comes to you, must be credible. We won't allow the process to be taken for a ride," Justice Thakur told Bhushan after he told the court that the NGO had so far filed 50 cases. 
 
"We must be convinced that your petition is genuine. Otherwise (Harish) Salve (who appeared for Reliance) will say you are settlings scores," the CJI said. The case has been reserved by the court for the final order. 
 
Bhushan, on the other hand, said that public interest is a hige factor in deciding whether or not to file a case in court, and that commercial interest might be incidental. 
 
To this, the CJI rejected the view and said, "When so much time is spent on them (such cases) and litigation costs are so high, we must devise ways to keep out commercial fights and business rivalries. We may end up spending precious time to only draw a blank." 
 
<a href="http://legaltrigger.com/images/5052261194.jpg">Image source</a>

PILs with commercial interest might be disallowed, hints the Supreme Court

<ul><li><keyword id="2845406" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="E-pharmacies">E-pharmacies</keyword> in <keyword id="3658" type="LOCATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="India">India</keyword> have been prohibited from selling any medicines online, said Times of India citing a recent order by Delhi Court. </li><li>The <keyword id="6355014" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="delhi-high-court">Delhi High Court</keyword> has ordered the center and the state government to execute the ban immediately. </li><li>The ordered was issued in response to a public interest litigation that stated that the government has failed in regulating the sale of such medicine exposing consumers to the higher risk of ill-health. </li></ul>The Delhi High Court on Wednesday directed the Central and the Delhi governments to impose a ban on the online sale of medicine by e-pharmacies across India, the <a href="https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/delhi-high-court-bans-online-medical-sales-across-country/articleshow/67068317.cms">Times of India </a>reported. The order was issued in response to a public interest litigation filed by Zaheer Ahmed who said that e-pharmacies in India sell a large volume of medicines daily without a prescription, which in turn, exposes consumers to higher health risks. In India, the digital sale of medicines is not regulated leading e-pharmacies to sell ‘misbranded and substandard’ products which are not sold otherwise, said the report. India also prohibits the online sale of medicine under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and Pharmacy Act, 1948, PIL pointed out. While the Drug Controller General of India had already issued an order in 2015 to all states to prevent the sale of any medicine online without a prescription, the e-pharmacies continue to sell thousands of medicines daily, said the report citing the PIL. The Union Health Ministry had also reportedly drafted a set of rules on the sale of drugs by e-pharmacies, but these rules were apparently not implemented. See also: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/politics/policy/no-need-for-rti-application-residents-in-this-indian-state-can-now-visit-any-government-office-and-check-official-records-once-a-week/articleshow/66916066.cms">‘No need for RTI application’: Residents in this Indian state can now visit any government office and check official records once a week</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/careers/an-indian-electricity-tribunal-has-a-bizarre-job-requirement-you-must-not-be-married-twice/articleshow/67055748.cms">An Indian electricity tribunal has a bizarre job requirement — you must not be married twice</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/politics/policy/india-may-ban-its-poultry-and-meat-industry-from-using-a-growth-promoting-drug-linked-to-antibiotic-resistance/articleshow/66941051.cms">India may ban its poultry and meat industry from using a growth-promoting drug linked to antibiotic-resistance</a>

An Indian court has banned the sale of online medicines because of safety concerns

<ul><li>The Bombay High Court had asked the Central Government for a review of the popular mobile game PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds (PUBG) in April.</li><li>A public interest litigation (PIL) lodged with the Bombay court in April was specifically asking the bench to ban PUBG from schools.</li><li>The Centre has said it is ‘difficult to ban PUBG’ in its findings on Wednesday.</li></ul>PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds (PUBG) has been under on the Indian government’s radar for ‘distracting’ students from their studies for a while now. But it’s unlikely that the game will <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/pubg-ban-india-healthy-gaming-experience-proposed/articleshow/68058605.cms">actually be banned</a> after the Central Government said that its ‘<a href="https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/difficult-to-ban-pubg-centre-to-bombay-hc/articleshow/70563343.cms">difficult to ban PUBG</a>’ after looking into the matter, according to Advocate Rui Rodrigues. A world of princes and princesses In April this year, a bench headed by Chief Justice Pradeep Nandrajog and Justice Nitin Jamdar presided over a public interest litigation (<a href="http://violent">PIL</a>) lodged by a student, Ahad Nizam, through his mother, Mariam. The PIL sought to ban the game in schools citing ‘violence and aggression’. The bench, reminiscing the days old, stated that children used to fantasize about “a world of princes and princesses and chasing demons and living happily ever after.” Adding that there was “no violence” back then. Ban unlikely Advocate Rui Rodrigues presenting the details of the review by the Centre a couple of days ago pointed out that it is “technically difficult to ban all the sources (such as websites, mobiles and other communication devices) from where the game is available unless the creator or the parent company retrieves the game from circulation or administers some restrictions.” “Parental awareness is required to control children's access to it,” Rodrigues added. PUBG’s ride in India has been no less than a roller coaster with the game <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/pubg-mobile-update-features-new-game-management-system-to-warn-users/articleshow/69351839.cms">being blamed</a> for suicides, murders, poor academic performances and seemingly irking every parent in the general vicinity from where its played. Teens were even <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/pubg-ban-leads-to-arrests-in-rajkot-india/articleshow/68404164.cms">jailed</a> over playing the game in Gujarat when the local police placed a ban on the battle royale game. See also: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/pubg-ban-india-healthy-gaming-experience-proposed/articleshow/68058605.cms">Faced with ban threats, PUBG is trying to placate Indian parents and the government</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/pubg-mobile-update-features-new-game-management-system-to-warn-users/articleshow/69351839.cms">Warning: You’ve been playing PUBG for far too long</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/pubg-ban-leads-to-arrests-in-rajkot-india/articleshow/68404164.cms">Teens are getting arrested for playing PUBG in India</a>

‘Difficult to ban PUBG’: Indian government leaves it up to the parents

<ul><li>Despite being home to around 5 million people with hearing disabilities, <keyword id="3658" type="LOCATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="India">India</keyword> still doesn’t have a formally recognised <keyword id="6641747" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="sign-language">sign language</keyword> under its Constitution. </li><li>The Delhi High Court is currently deliberating a public interest litigation to recognise <keyword id="1197773" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Indian-Sign-Language">Indian Sign Language</keyword> (ISL) as one of India’s 22 official languages. </li><li>In March 2018, <keyword id="6358777" type="LOCATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="New-Delhi">New Delhi</keyword>’s Indian Sign Language Research and Training Centre, which was set up by the central government in 2015, launched the first ever dictionary for ISL.</li></ul> Despite having one of the largest populations of deaf or hearing-impaired people in the world - at around <a href="http://enabled.in/wp/census-of-india-2011-disabled-population/">5 million people </a>according to the 2011 Census - India still doesn’t have a formally recognised system of sign language to call its own. This is unfortunate. The prevailing sign languages, <keyword id="402326" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="American-Sign-Language">American Sign Language</keyword> and <keyword id="969314" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="British-Sign-Language">British Sign Language</keyword>, while globally applicable, are not attuned to the cultural nuances, body language cues or <keyword id="477335" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="grammar">grammar</keyword> of the Hindi-speaking populace. However, this is hopefully set to change. The Delhi High Court is currently deliberating a public interest litigation to recognise Indian Sign Language (ISL) as one of India’s 22 official languages. In fact, it submitted the matter for the consideration of <a href="https://indianexpress.com/article/india/delhi-hc-seeks-response-from-centre-on-plea-seeking-official-recognition-of-indian-sign-language-5353129/">the central government</a> in September. The petition, which was filed by Nipun Malhotra, a disabled person, is part of a wider movement to secure the rights of hearing-impaired and disabled people in India. If Indian Sign Language is recognised as an official language, it will ensure the rights of people using the language — especially as they interact with the outside world. This involves anything from getting a driver’s license or applying for a job. Barring the HC petition, Indian Sign Language is also slowly gaining traction due to the efforts of New Delhi’s Indian Sign Language Research and Training Centre. The institution, which was set up by the central government in 2015, launched <a href="http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=177900">the first ever dictionary</a> for ISL in March 2018, codifying five different categories of words - legal, academic, colloquial, medical and technical - into one document. There were about 3,000 words covered in all. The centre is also working on solving a nagging problem - the scarcity of ISL interpreters. It is offering training courses on ISLin this regard. In January 2017, PRI, a think tank, estimated that there were <a href="https://www.pri.org/stories/2017-01-04/deaf-community-millions-hearing-india-only-just-beginning-sign">only 250 </a>certified sign language interpreters in India.

The quest to formalise Indian Sign Language is gaining momentum

<ul><li>On 26 September, a three-judge bench of <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> approved a plan to commence the <keyword id="1057009" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="live-streaming">live-streaming</keyword> of its proceedings to the <keyword id="207034" type="POSITION" weightage="20" keywordseo="general-public">general public</keyword>. </li><li>Live-streaming will mainly extend to cases directly related to articles in the <keyword id="6363843" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="constitution">Constitution</keyword>, not personal matters. </li><li>There is, however, one condition that the Supreme Court laid down. There will have to be 10-minute lag in the broadcast so as to ensure that any information that should not be shown can be cut out. </li></ul> In response to a series of public interest litigations demanding that court proceedings be live-streamed, in July 2018 India’s Supreme Court started looking into the possibility of doing so. The court asked Attorney General K K Venugopal to submit a report on protocols for live-streaming. At the time, all parties expressed the benefits of such a move. These included greater <keyword id="6434802" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="transparency">transparency</keyword> and information for litigants and their clients, a reduction in crowds as well as an educational component for law students and legal interns. The rationale seemed clear: if India already had a system of open courts in place, why not evolve to a system of virtual open courts? With the live broadcast of Parliamentary sessions, a precedent was already in place. As a result, on 26 September, a three-judge bench of Supreme Court approved a plan to commence the live-streaming of its proceedings to the general public, mainly for cases directly related to articles in the Constitution - which have the most implications for the Indian citizenry. Speaking on the verdict, Justice Chandrachud likened greater transparency to “sunlight”, which he termed as “the best disinfectant”. The judicial authority has asked the central government to frame regulations for this. It is likely that cases involving personal matters such as matrimonial issues will be excluded from public broadcast. The move will reportedly be implemented gradually. In the initial phase, proceedings from either one court will be live-streamed or a select number of constitutionally important cases will streamed on a pilot basis. Thereafter, more and more courts in the apex court will open their doors to live-streaming. There is, however, one condition that the Supreme Court laid down, which slightly contradicts its “transparency-first” approach . There will have to be 10-minute lag in the broadcast so as to ensure that any information that should not be shown can be cut out of the footage. The court will also retain the copyright over the content that is broadcast.

Transparency galore: India’s Supreme Court has allowed its proceedings to be streamed live to the public

<ul><li>India’s three main surveillance projects — <keyword id="109740" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="NATGRID">NATGRID</keyword>, <keyword id="15615" type="CITY" weightage="20" keywordseo="cms">CMS</keyword>, and <keyword id="26425" type="CITY" weightage="20" keywordseo="Netra">NETRA</keyword> — have been directed to stop collecting data by the Delhi High Court. </li><li>The order comes as public interest litigation (PLI) filed by lawyer Prashant Bhushan on behalf of the CPLI cited that there is ‘insufficient oversight’ allowing the mass surveillance of Indian citizens and breaking their <keyword id="515140" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="right-to-privacy">right to privacy</keyword>. </li><li>NATGRID has access to 12 categories of data, CMS can listen in on your phone conversations, and NETRA can track everything you do online. </li></ul>The Delhi High Court has issued a notice today asking India’s central government to stop collecting data through their three main surveillance systems — National Intelligence Grid (NATGRID), Central Monitoring System (CMS) and Network Traffic Analysis (NETRA). The notice is in response to public interest litigation (PLI) filed by lawyer and activist Prashant Bhushan on behalf of the NGO called the Center for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL). In the appeal, Bhushan argues that the three systems create a net of 360-degree surveillance on Indian citizens. They allow central and state law enforcement agencies to intercept and monitor all telecommunications in bulk which is an infringement of individuals’ fundamental right to privacy. <div type="twitter" handle="barandbench" handlename="Bar &amp; Bench" image="http://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1304761912068984833/5-qPfQOb_normal.jpg" favoritecount="55" retweetcount="8" status="#Breaking: Delhi High Court issues notice in PIL to direct Centre to stop collection of data through NATGRID, Centr… https://t.co/SkXhSb80Gl" createdat="1606888535000" id="1334013320572014592"></div> The plea further contends that there is an ‘insufficient oversight mechanism’ to authorise and review the interception and monitoring orders issued by the state agencies under the existing legal framework. What are NATGRID, NETRA and CMS? NATGRID, NETRA and CMS are surveillance systems. This means they collect data in order to keep an eye out for anything that could threaten national security. NATGRID allows investigation and law enforcement agencies to access real-time information from data stored within agencies like the Income Tax Department, banks, insurance companies, the Indian Railways, and other offices. There are a total of 21 categories of data that NATGRID has access to. Where the NATGRID has access to real-time data, CMS is centralised telephone interception provisioning system. And, it’s exactly what it sounds like. It can bypass the middleman — the telecom companies — to directly monitor text messages, social media posts and phone calls. NETRA is the third leg of India’s security infrastructure. While the CMS is tapping into your phone’s network, NETRA is watching everything you do online — not just on social media. It can monitor any text-based messages containing direct messages on Facebook, within your personal emails or online blogs. Using filters and keywords, it can identify words even in encrypted messages. How does NATGRID undermine the right to privacy? NATGRID was established through governmental notifications rather than through legislation passed in the Parliament. Even though it helps the project come to fruition faster, it also undermines the system of checks and balances essential to a democracy, according to <a href="https://www.prsindia.org/theprsblog/natgrid-should-parliament-have-role">PRS India</a>. Considering that NATGRID can access information of private individuals, it also has a bearing on their fundamental rights — like the right to privacy, as cited by Bhushan. Unlike India, countries like the US and the European Union (EU) have comprehensive privacy laws. They include the conditions under which access to databases would be allowed and limitations on how such data can be used. UIDAI, like NATGRID, was formed using governmental notifications. It was established as an executive authority, and still functions without a statutory mandate. What roles to CMS and NETRA play? The underlying logic for developing CMS and NETRA was to monitor terrorist activities mainly after the terrorist bomb attack in Mumbai on November 26, 2008. With both of them, the problem again boils down to a lack of transparency in the absence of data protection laws. The general public has no way of knowing if and when a person’s data has been intercepted or how data is being used. CMS and NETRA allow for mass surveillance with the potential to target large groups of people without a valid reason. To solve for the lack of transparency, the PLI filed by Bhushan seeks the creation of a permanent independent oversight body — either judicial or parliamentary — for issuing and reviewing lawful interception and monitoring warrants under the enabling provisions of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 and the Information Technology Act, 2000. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/apps/news/fortnites-biggest-ever-event-saw-15-million-players-3-million-viewers-and-took-twitch-down/articleshow/79523514.cms">Fortnite's biggest ever event saw 15 million players, 3 million viewers and took Twitch down</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/science/health/news/pfizer-covid-19-vaccine-can-survive-in-fridge-for-five-days-claims-company/articleshow/79526886.cms">Pfizer claims its newly approved COVID-19 vaccine can survive without sub-zero temperatures for five days</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/apps/news/google-maps-has-a-new-community-feed-which-looks-a-lot-like-yelp-or-tripadvisor-on-steroids/articleshow/79525031.cms">Google Maps has a new 'community feed', which looks a lot like Yelp or TripAdvisor on steroids</a>

India's three main surveillance projects NATGRID, CMS and NETRA have been directed to stop collecting data citing breach of privacy

The <keyword id="6354335" type="CITY" weightage="20" keywordseo="reserve-bank-of-india">Reserve Bank of India</keyword> has told the <keyword id="6355014" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Delhi-High-Court">Delhi High Court</keyword> that the cap on the number of withdrawals from ATMs by banking customers without being charged is a policy decision taken in public interest. 
 A bench of Chief Justice <keyword id="2206646" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="G-Rohini">G Rohini</keyword> and Justice <keyword id="803423" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Sangita-Dhingra-Sehgal">Sangita Dhingra Sehgal</keyword> was also informed by RBI that the ATM facility was made available with a view to reduce "cash usage and increase electronic transactions in the country". 
 RBI was responding to public interest litigation (<keyword id="6355791" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="PIL">PIL</keyword>) filed by advocate <keyword id="1684541" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Swati-Aggarwal">Swati Aggarwal</keyword>, seeking directions to allow banking customers to make an unlimited number of transactions free of any charge on their own bank ATMs, according to a news agency. 
 
India's central banking institution, which controls the monetary policy of the rupee, however, opposed the PIL, saying it is "not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed, as RBI has not violated any laws of the land". 
 
"The PIL is not meant to be a weapon to challenge the financial or economic decisions which are taken by the RBI in exercise of their administrative/ statutory powers and in the public interest...," RBI's counsel said. 
 
On this, the bench has asked the RBI to file an affidavit with regard to its contention made before it by next date of hearing, December 5. 
 
The RBI's oral submissions were made after the high court on last date of hearing had questioned its decision to put a cap on withdrawals by banking customers using their ATM cards, saying account holders were being "unnecessarily taxed". 
 As per RBI's new guidelines, bank customers in six metros -- Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai, <keyword id="6354925" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="Kolkata">Kolkata</keyword>, Hyderabad and <keyword id="6354321" type="CITY" weightage="20" keywordseo="Bengaluru">Bengaluru</keyword> -- are allowed to withdraw money free of charge only five times a month and every transaction beyond this limit will be charged Rs 20 per use. 
 
Image- India Times

RBI feels account holders were
being "unnecessarily taxed” by putting cap on ATM withdrawal

<table class="image-container float_right click-to-enlarge" width="200"><tr><td><div class="image"><a title_source="Flickr/Cali4beach" title_caption="These are expensive trolls." class="zoomin" href="http://static4.businessinsider.com/image/50a2908cecad04967b000012-960/trolls-1.jpg"></a></div><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/cali4beach/6039415545/">Flickr/Cali4beach</a>These are expensive trolls.</td></tr></table><keyword id="6355629" type="CITY" weightage="60" keywordseo="Google">Google</keyword> — along with Blackberry and other tech companies — has asked the FTC to pay greater attention to <keyword id="1016025" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="patent-trolls">patent trolls</keyword>, who embroil companies in expensive litigation over bogus claims on the ownership of new technologies.
Patent trolls, or "patent assertion entities," cost U.S. companies <a href="http://www.bu.edu/law/faculty/scholarship/workingpapers/documents/BessenJ_MeurerM062512rev062812.pdf">$30 billion a year in "direct costs"</a> for fighting off legal challenges from companies that don't make anything but simply want to be paid to stop suing, <a href="http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.ca/2013/04/its-time-to-take-action-against-patent.html">Google wrote on its public policy blog</a>.
Their latest tactic is "asymmetric warfare," in which a company that possesses legitimate patents may split them up and sell them to troll companies, who then sue others for using them on multiple fronts, even though the trolls have no interest in actually manufacturing any of the patented products.
Using unusually robust language, Google described patent litigation as a war against trolls that would require "nuclear deterrence" to end it:
This trend has been referred to as “patent privateering”: a company sells patents to trolls with the goal of waging asymmetric warfare against its competitors.
... It also undermines incentives for companies to work together towards “patent peace” through good-faith negotiation and cross-licensing. If cross-licensing is nuclear deterrence for patents, then privateering has the opposite effect, facilitating patent proliferation and aggression.
About 62 percent of all patent litigation comes from trolls, Google said, using this chart to illustrate how prevalent trolls have become in the courts:
<div class="image-container click-to-enlarge" style="width:600px"><div class="image"><a title_source="Google" title_caption="" class="zoomin" href="http://static4.businessinsider.com/image/516018c669beddd02b00001d-960/screen%20shot%202013-04-06%20at%208.37.24%20am.png"></a></div>Google</div>

You Searched For "public interest litigation" and got 9 results

Movie-goers in Maharashtra will soon be able to take their own food into theatres

Kavita Majumdar

PILs with commercial interest might be disallowed, hints the Supreme Court

BI India Bureau

An Indian court has banned the sale of online medicines because of safety concerns

BI India Bureau

‘Difficult to ban PUBG’: Indian government leaves it up to the parents

BI India Tech Bureau

The quest to formalise Indian Sign Language is gaining momentum

Dilsher Dhillon

Transparency galore: India’s Supreme Court has allowed its proceedings to be streamed live to the public

Dilsher Dhillon

India's three main surveillance projects NATGRID, CMS and NETRA have been directed to stop collecting data citing breach of privacy

Prabhjote Gill

RBI feels account holders were being "unnecessarily taxed” by putting cap on ATM withdrawal

BI India Bureau

Google Says 'Asymmetric Warfare' Against 'Trolls' Costs $30 Billion A Year

Jim Edwards

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides