| Below is NAFCU Senior Vice President of Government Affairs and General Counsel Carrie Hunt's letter to the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade Chairman Michael Burgess and Ranking Member Jan Schakowsky in advance of this week's subcommittee hearing, “Update: Patent Demand Letter Practices and Solutions.” Members of the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade were copied on the letter.
In the letter, Hunt says "A growing number of credit unions are reporting receipt of demand letters from law firms representing patent assertion entities, claiming patent infringement, with the option to settle or face litigation." She says a legislative solution is necessary to curb these deceptive practices and urges leaders of the subcommittee to address the demand letter issue in any legislative action they take. If you would like more information on this matter or would like to speak about this with a NAFCU expert, please let me know. Thank you. Dana Kauffman
February 24, 2015 The Honorable Michael Burgess The Honorable Jan Schakowsky Re: Patent Demand Letter Practices and Solutions Dear Chairman Burgess and Ranking Member Schakowsky: On behalf of the National Association of Federal Credit Unions (NAFCU), the only trade association exclusively representing the interests of our nation’s credit unions, I write today in advance of this week’s subcommittee hearing, “Update: Patent Demand Letter Practices and Solutions.” On behalf of NAFCU member credit unions and the 100 million credit union members across the country, we appreciate the subcommittee’s continued attention to this matter. A growing number of credit unions are reporting receipt of demand letters from law firms representing patent assertion entities, claiming patent infringement, with the option to settle or face litigation. These deceptive letters are confusing and misleading as they often allege that the use of everyday technology violates the patent holders’ rights. Further, these letters typically state vague or hypothetical theories of infringement, and often overstate or misinterpret the patent in question. Because the cost of litigation is often more expensive than paying a settlement amount, these “patent trolls” use the threat of litigation as leverage to extract payment from the recipient business who settles in lieu of running the risk of a complex and lengthy legal battle. NAFCU believes a legislative solution is necessary to alter the intimidating business model used by these patent assertion entities and will continue to be supportive of Congressional efforts to curb these practices. As the subcommittee examines this issue further, we would urge you to address the demand letter issue in any action that you take. Thank you for holding this important hearing. If my staff or I can be of assistance to you, or if you have any questions regarding the impact of patent trolls on credit unions, please feel free to contact myself, or NAFCU’s Director of Legislative Affairs, Jillian Pevo, at 703-842-2836. Sincerely, Carrie R. Hunt cc: Members of the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade |