[powertower]

My understanding is that Microsoft hates software patents (at least when BillG was CEO), has only registered them out of necessity, has historically only sued relatively few other companies, and only done so with either real patents (non-obvious, read beyond the patent title) or as a retaliation of being sued itself. I’m sure there are a few exceptions here as there are always.

[dstein]

They aren't suing every Android OEM out of necessity. Microsoft has converted to patent troll in lieu of innovating in the mobile space.

[ssebro]

That's not exactly true- they are innovating, but they're also a patent troll. There's no reason why they can't be both.

[cube13]

You can't be a patent troll if you're actually making a product. The entire "business model" of a patent troll is to make money off of lawsuits, not from actually selling things.

[stcredzero]

A friend of mine was working in the Hustler store in Cincinnati in the late 90's/early 2000. You know how Larry Flynt opened a store in Cincinnati, despite the legislation passed specifically to exclude his businesses? They had boxes of butterfly, rainbow, and unicorn stickers in the basement. Every single sticker was inventoried separately, so legally, the Hustler store didn't have a majority inventory of adult items.

There's nothing preventing a sufficiently large company from being some fraction X and another fraction Y.

All systems have bugs, which is why simpler systems are easier to manage in the long run.

[eru]

Yes. Though of course, if a big company that was actually making things, bought a patent troll and just let the get on with their business, I'd still be inclined to call the new subsidiary a patent troll.

[cube13]

This is true. I probably should have said "companies that make products related to their patents cannot be patent trolls".

[ZeSmith]

They're using their patents to crush their competitors. It's not patent trolling, it's anti-competitive behavior.

[raganwald]

I don't think they're trying to "crush" Samsung by extorting $15 per handset, I'd say they're trying to maximize their revenues by charging as much as they possibly can without triggering a lawsuit.

If they wanted to crush Samsung, they'd insist that Samsung sell WP7 phones or nothing. If their patents hold up, that is their right.

[tzs]

By the very definition of "patent troll", Microsoft is not a patent troll.

[dstein]

According to Wikipedia:

  The term "patent troll" was used as early as 1993 to
  describe companies that file aggressive patent lawsuits.

[meow]

Their outlook on using their patent portfolio has changed in these past few years. As their reputation for innovation goes down, their reputation for trolling is going up.I guess trolling is inversely proportional to innovation after all.

[mikeryan]

I find this hard to believe. It may have been their MO in the very early days but they later started building one of the largest patent portfolios in the world and their CTO went on to become one of the largest patent trolls in the world.

[yuhong]

Amazon is a famous example of this. Search for "Amazon patent" on Slashdot for some history.