However, I think you can hold your IP in an offshore company that would be significantly difficult for US jurisdiction to touch.
Is anybody using this strategy to avoid IP related litigation?
If so, what countries are you using to hold your IP?
Any specific precautions you are using to ensure the protections are enforceable?
If a Swedish company owns the IP and the IP is on servers there, US courts can't touch it.
How can a US court have any jurisdiction on a corporation or a data center in another country? I think it would pretty difficult for a US court to exercise authority over another country's legal system.
The only option the plaintiff would have is to take legal action in whatever country the IP was located in (i.e. they'd have to sue in Sweden).
If you pick a country that doesn't respect US trademarks or patents, then the plaintiff wouldn't have a case.
Even if they might have a case, picking a small, remote country would substantially increase their legal costs, which would deter them from pursuing legal action.
With all the patent BS going on now, this seems to me like it's a viable option to reduce risk.
I just want to hear from somebody who understands this ownership/operational structure and has (or has not) decided to implement it.
How this might apply to a SaaS company is an interesting question. If all the business is legally conducted in Sweden, perhaps there would be no US IP issues. But if any portion of the business in conducted in the US, that portion can be shut down if their is a patent issue in the US.
I think it works with a SaaS product, assuming you keep all business related stuff (Domain registration, servers, business incorporation, bank accounts, etc) in another country (i.e. Sweden).
I just don't know which countries would be best...