[capableweb]

If you're licensing a patent to others with reasonable terms, it's not a patent troll.

I understand you think they provide a service since you seem to not understand what a patent troll is.

As a reminder, a patent troll company is a company "that attempts to enforce patent rights against accused infringers far beyond the patent's actual value or contribution to the prior art" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_troll)

They don't sell any services, don't do any (reasonable) licensing, nor provide any goods.

[endisneigh]

Patent trolling is not a company category, rather a behavior of a company. Furthermore patents themselves are goods that can be licensed, so my point stands.

Not to mention “trolling” is already passing judgement on the activity to begin with. The actual service is licensing. I’ll leave it to the courts to determine whether enforcement of patents qualifies as trolling or not.

[capableweb]

> Patent trolling is not a company category

Oh I'm sorry. I meant to say "Patent Trolling Companies", is it easier to understand now?

I'm sure you are aware that there actually is a category of companies that just participate in "patent trolling", and do nothing else. Not sure why you're being so pedantic about the grammar instead of trying to reply to the actual arguments...