Letters to the Editor: Trolling for Patents, Toll Roads, Brokers and Shippers

Click here to write a Letter to the Editor.

b> Trolling for Patents

As chairman of one of the increasing number of motor carriers that have been shaken down by the patent troller named in the “Opinion” column of your Aug. 28 edition, I would encourage American Trucking Associations to assume a leadership role in advocating effective patent reform, and members of our industry to begin to make a loud noise on this matter with your U.S. senators and congressmen.

It is quite apparent this patent troller, working through, I suspect, a Chicago contingency fee law firm, has targeted our industry as ripe for this shakedown.

Despite the fact our patent counsel advised us the infringement claim was without merit, as attorney Andrew Gray states in his op-ed, we were faced with the reality of

2 million to $3 million in estimated litigation defense costs versus paying a substantial licensing fee demanded by the patent troller.

Believe me when I tell you that our industry is absolutely targeted by these people and, when they draw your card, you will find yourself first receiving a demand letter, quickly followed by service of a complaint for patent infringement filed in a federal district court.

I would encourage industry members, under the aggressive leadership and direction of ATA, to take prompt action to lobby proactively for meaningful patent reform.

Given the complexities of patent reform, it is imperative that ATA accept a leadership role on this important initiative. Without effective, concerted and sustained effort, we will continue to be individually picked off by these people.

While I’m on the soapbox, given all the talk of “tort reform,” and its associated complexities and lack of meaningful progress, perhaps a simpler strategy is a two-point plan that would effectively accomplish the same desired effect as tort reform:

1. Eliminate contingent legal fees.

2. Require the loser in litigated matters to pay the winner’s legal fees.

Eliminating the pot of gold at the end of the legal rainbow (contingency fees) and imposing a penalty for unreasonably litigating (loser pays winner’s legal fees) would, I believe, create a multitude of vacant space in our country’s currently overcrowded courtrooms.

Peter Latta

i>Chairman

. Duie Pyle Inc.

est Chester, Pa.

Toll Roads

A survey conducted by the Government Accountability Office has revealed that about half the states in the United States are planning new toll roads. A federal appeals court recently ruled that several trucking groups, including American Trucking Associations, did not have the legal standing to challenge a toll increase on several bridges linking New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

On the surface, this does not seem to be a big deal. However, when you put it in the context of the trucking industry and shipper business, it will become a major issue with freight rates and deliverables.

The added cost and record-keeping will be huge. Shippers will have to bear the cost, which will be passed on from the trucking companies. Ultimately, the consumer will pay for this in higher costs.

I believe we have a crisis in the making. Unless shippers and trucking stand united, we are going to see this sleeping giant affect our pocketbooks significantly. The trucking industry already pays 40 cents of every dollar in highway taxes, chiefly through

uel taxes and registration fees.

There are some who will say, “Well, I just won’t drive on a toll road.” But, when using a toll road is the only way to get from point A to point B, you will. A toll road on our interstate highways and secondary roadways is not the answer to improving congestion or road conditions.

Here in Texas, we are seeing more and more toll roads. Two Texas Republicans and a Democrat are opposing a 50-year plan by Gov. Rick Perry to build 4,000 miles of Texas toll roads. The plan could cost up to $183 billion.

A lot has already been written about this. It is time to act. Contact your local, state and federal representatives and start expressing your outrage. Action, not debate, is what is necessary now.

Ray Middleton

i> Transportation & Logistics Manager

etl-Span I Ltd.

allas

Brokers and Shippers

There is no question that the current debate over whether a carrier should be allowed to collect payment from a shipper in the event of nonpayment by a broker is a very delicate matter.

As a carrier, we recognize that brokers perform a valuable function, or else the brokerage service wouldn’t exist. Consequently, for a carrier to damage the broker/shipper relationship through an overzealous collection process is not in the best interest of a carrier or the industry.

However, the United States District Court, Western District of Washington at Seattle, said it best in a recent ruling where the carrier was awarded recovery from the shipper even though the shipper had paid the broker:

“We think that our result comports with economic reality. A freight forwarder provides a service. He sells his expertise and experience in booking and preparing cargo for shipment. He depends upon the fees paid by both shipper and carrier. He has few assets, and he books amounts of cargo far exceeding his net worth.

Carriers must expect full payment will come from the shipper, although it may pass through the forwarder’s hands. While the carrier may extend credit to the forwarder, there is no economically rational motive for the carrier to release the shipper. The more parties that are liable, the greater the assurance for the carrier that he will get paid.”

It can’t be said any better than that.

Eli Willis

i> Chief Operating Officer

odfrey Trucking Inc.

alt Lake City

i>These letters appear in the Sep. 11 print edition of Transport Topics. Subscribe today.