An article is here. Peoplel are slowly beginning to realize that it's hard to define a "troll." I always use the example of distressed patents: do we really want patents sold at bankruptcy to have less value to the purchaser solely because it doesn't make the product covered by the patent?
Our NYT op-ed, below, I still think is the right approach… with 285 interpreted right!
Thought the linked article was rather weak. Any reference to government treatment of the “Troll” problem at this stage that does not also include the GAO report (and instead relies far too much on the White House (WH aka Witch Hunt) report is automatically suspect.
Comments are closed.