Heard an interesting counterpoint to this from a patent attorney. In the IP ecosystem patent trolls serve as a sort of check on the big companies - the apex predators - to stop them from willfully infringing on your patents and then bankrupting you in litigation.
While you as a startup may not have the resources to go after them in court; your IP assets in the hands of a competent and aggressive patent troll could be a very big problem for Big Co.
So in that sense they are also kind of like a parasite that infects the apex predators who eat tainted meat.
Aren't patent trolls called trolls because they litigate on broad patents, for which prior art exists in many case? If so, they can't protect a startup in any way unless you create broad and invalid patents.
Your IP assets can be used to litigate by companies that aren't patent trolls.
Don't think I've ever worked for a startup that had any patents whatsoever. I think I consulted with one IIRC, and they folded largely due to their hyperfocus on tech to the detriment of building something people actually wanted to pay for. Filing a patent was probably a symptom of that problem.
Its more like smaller public companies trying to keep bigger public companies in check.
Well I think it depends on the industry. Patents tend to be less relevant in software. But in other capital intensive industries where there is some manufacture of physical matter - like biotech or hardware - IP is a big deal.
That's true, I'm mostly commenting on software because the article is about software, and this might be anecdata, but it certainly seems to me like patent trolls are more prevalent in software.
Nice idea, except no one you mentioned spends their time doing patents. It's just big companies who are told by consultants to beef up their patent portfolio, and when they fail like Caspian, the remains are snatched up by bottom feeders who go around harassing others, preferably of course startups and others with no real resources.
The big companies beefing up their portfolios is more of a defensive measure from what I have been told. The threat of a countersuit makes IP litigation among peers a game of mutually assured destruction. Funny quote from a VC friend “patents are a sport of kings.”
But defensive portfolios are not a concern for patent trolls. They can’t be countered for infringement because they don’t make anything!
But you are not wrong that they can be like gnats that suck the blood from startups. In one car I heard of some a patent troll engaged in behavior bordering on criminal extortion - threatening mom and pops businesses for using printers and fax machines. All I am saying is that they play a role in balancing and maintaining the health of the IP ecosystem.
Except it doesn't apply to patent trolls at all. They don't go after big companies, they mostly go after small ones that they don't expect to fight back, and they mostly use broad and vague patents that shouldn't even have been issued. That's what makes them patent trolls, they're patents are BS.
This isn't an interesting counterpoint. This is the de facto narrative regarding patent lawyers and patent trolls masquerading as firms that act as though they somehow contribute.
While you as a startup may not have the resources to go after them in court; your IP assets in the hands of a competent and aggressive patent troll could be a very big problem for Big Co.
So in that sense they are also kind of like a parasite that infects the apex predators who eat tainted meat.