When intellectual property attorneys take on Big Tech to defend patent holders, they often face more than just legal opposition—they become targets of personal and professional attacks. Major technology companies, with their vast resources and influence, frequently seek to discredit attorneys who challenge their market dominance through aggressive litigation strategies and personal smears.  My personal story is among these victims, but first let's talk about Ray Niro.

The Case of Ray Niro

One of the most infamous examples is pioneering attorney in patent litigation, Ray Niro. Niro's skills as a negotiator and trial lawyer made him a hero to inventors and a painful thorn in the side of corporate America.  From 1994 to 2001, Niro said, his firm won 20 multimillion-dollar jury verdicts in a row generating in excess of $400 million.

A personal coup came in 2008 after Niro got into a war of words with the then-anonymous blogger behind Patent Troll Tracker, a website critical of Niro and his business model. Niro offered a $15,000 bounty to anyone who could reveal the blogger's identity. Richard Frenkel, then of Cisco Systems, now of Latham & Watkins, subsequently unmasked himself after a reader threatened to identify him. According to Niro, nobody claimed the bounty.

Erich Spangenberg: From Litigator to Pariah

Erich Spangenberg, another prominent attorney and patent monetization expert, faced similar treatment. His aggressive legal tactics in enforcing patents led to him being demonized by Big Tech and labeled a “patent troll,” despite representing legitimate patent holders. Companies went as far as backing narratives that painted him as an opportunist rather than an advocate for inventors' rights.

Recent Attacks: The Case of Bill Ramey

Hitting close to home is my own personal story of being targeted by Big Tech.  In late 2023, Big Tech-affiliated media outlets and legal adversaries launched personal attacks against me, including allegations intended to tarnish my professional reputation. Even going as far as anonymously publishing slanderous, defamatory, and false information about my wife in a tabloid law blog (and she's not even a lawyer!). This followed my firm's successful enforcement actions against major tech companies, further demonstrating how personal attacks are used as a deterrent against IP attorneys willing to challenge industry giants. These attacks embolden the lawyers at Ramey LLP to continue doing what they are doing as it is working. 

The Unofficial Strategy: Discredit and Destroy

The playbook is clear:

Step one: Label attorneys as “troll enablers” – Big Tech funds media campaigns that portray attorneys who defend inventors as extortionists.

Step two: Public smearing – Blogs, journalists, and tech influencers are mobilized to publish hit pieces.

Step three: Professional targeting – Complaints are filed at bar associations, and legal ethics are questioned to create reputational damage.

Step four: Litigation abuse – Counterclaims, motions to sanction, and other legal tactics are used to drain attorneys' resources and deter future litigation.

 Why This Matters & What Can Be Done

The attacks on IP attorneys aren't just about discrediting individuals—they're part of a broader effort to weaken patent rights and prevent inventors from challenging corporate giants. By making it costly and personally risky to defend patent holders, Big Tech ensures that fewer lawyers are willing to take these cases, ultimately tilting the legal battlefield in their favor.

Moreover, Big Tech's goal of weak IP rights enables them to maintain their near monopoly-like power and prevents inventors with new, disruptive technology from acquiring the financing and investment they need to take the technology to the next level.  Who will invest large amounts of capital in new ideas if new, disruptive technology cannot be protected?  Or once protected by IP, that IP cannot be enforced.

The primary mechanism used by Big Tech to maintain their near monopoly like power is to make patent litigation so expensive that it is impossible for most patent owners to enforce their patents, thereby denying access to the courts, and closing the door on the small inventor or company to enforce their IP rights. 

The 2023 AIPLA Economic Survey states that when damages are less than $1 million, the costs of a patent infringement lawsuit per patent, for simple technologies is $300,000 through discovery and claim construction, and another $600,000 per patent to take the case through trial and appeal.  When the damages are between $1 million and $10 million, those numbers increase to $600,000 and $1 million per patent, respectively.  Where the damages alleged are between $10 million and $25 million, those numbers increase to $1.5 million and $3 million per patent.  The 2023 survey also revealed that when the damages alleged exceed $25 million, those numbers further increase to $1.5 and $3.625 million per patent.  For complex technologies, these reported costs can increase by up to 50%.  Congress and the courts should encourage every law and policy to open the courts to more IP owners.

To counter this, the legal community and policymakers must first expose and condemn these tactics – The public needs to be aware of how Big Tech weaponizes personal attacks against patent holders and their attorneys to suppress legitimate patent enforcement and seeks to weaken intellectual property rights.  Every Big Tech patent infringement lawsuit starts with a letter from Big Tech's lawyer threatening sanctions, every time, every case.  During the lawsuit, Big Tech's lawyer constantly threatens the plaintiff and its lawyer that sanctions will be sought against both the plaintiff and its lawyer, but if they drop the suit and extend a license, no sanctions will be sought.  Every Big Tech patent infringement lawsuit that is not won by the plaintiff ends with multiple motions for sanctions by Big Tech against the plaintiff and its lawyer.       

In enacting § 285, “Congress made plain its intention that such fees be allowed only in extraordinary circumstances. … The provision is also made general so as to enable the court to prevent a gross injustice to an alleged infringer.' 1946 U.S. Code Congressional Service 1386, 1387.”  Park-In-Theatres v. Perkins, 190 F.2d 137, 142 (9th Cir. 1951).  However, Big Tech claims every case is exceptional, that every case deserves a sanction under Section 285.  The worst part? This tactic is very effective as the vast majority of patent owners will not sue because of the risk in a fee award against them. 

If there was a mechanism within Section 285 jurisprudence that if the motion is lost, the moving party should be required to pay the attorneys' fees that the non-moving party incurred in defending the motion, it would help to solve this problem.  Perhaps clients who prevail over a § 285 motion should make use of 28 USC § 1927, as the majority of Big Tech's motions are unreasonable, vexatious and without legal basis.

Secondly, lawmakers should strengthen legal protections for attorneys – Just as whistleblowers are protected, attorneys fighting for inventors' rights should have safeguards against corporate retaliation.  Big Tech is trying to take away an inventor's constitutional right to enforce their patents. Just this past January, Big Tech company Dish Network filed a petition for certiorari, asking for review of whether district courts can make plaintiff's attorneys jointly liable for fee awards under § 285. DISH Network L.L.C. v. Dragon Intellectual Property, LLC, No. 24-726.  Imagine how hard it will be to enforce your patent if your attorney now has to worry about paying the other side's legal fees.

Third, there should be support for inventors and their legal defenders.  Organizations advocating for patent rights must stand with those attorneys willing to challenge Big Tech, ensuring they have the resources to fight back.  While there are many good organizations out there, we need more, and we need more engagement.  Just like Ray Niro smoked out the blogger, we need to smoke out these Big Tech strategies and defeat them. 

The right to defend and assert intellectual property should not come with the risk of personal and professional destruction. Until Big Tech's aggressive tactics are addressed, innovation itself remains under threat.  US innovation suffers from Big Tech's attacks seeking to weaken IP rights.  It is time for action.

At Ramey LLP, we look forward to continuing our fight to provide representation to all IP owners.  If you have IP that you believe is infringed, please contact us and we will do what we can to help.  All IP owners deserve representation.