This is going to be the case that breaks the USPTO system to bits. Either that, or no new companies are going to release in the US, and instead create shells in other countries, which will only hurt our economy more.
By selling inside of the United States that makes them subject to US patent laws. That is why Rovio is subject to this lawsuit despite being a Finnish company.
But if they are Finnish, how is someone going to their (Finnish) website and buying something different from someone physically traveling to Finland and buying it? They don't have a 'physical presence' in the US, so by the same rationale that US companies don't have to charge sales tax in other states it seems they should also not be bound by this.
If I make a website containing content illegal in <some country>, am I committing a crime in <some country> if someone from there looks at my page?
Yes you are. A court in Italy found several Google executives, that had never stepped foot in the country, personally criminally liable for a Google Video video that violated Italian law. Those execs wouldn't want to travel to Italy while that ruling stood, if it doesn't still. http://www.thedomains.com/2010/02/24/italy-finds-3-google-ex...
What makes Angry Birds the case that "breaks the USPTO system to bits"? There have been plenty of similarly (if not more) egregious, costly, and publicized cases.
I think the GP was referring to the broader case of Lodsys going after iOS Apps developers. The fact that they kicked it up a notch and went for larger companies with this move only increases the likelihood that more companies will feel that they are not immune to patent trolls.
