Talk:Patent troll

Benefits & Harm
Not having a specific replacement in mind. But to call patent trolls 'harmful' to manufacturing companies as like to say their suppliers are 'harmful' because they cost the manufacturers money too.

The section just seems totally from a manufacturers perspective, its generally just the pros and con for them. - Si — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.69.194.158 (talk) 19:53, 21 June 2007‎

The Vagueness Criticism is Ridiculous.
"# Vagueness. The term "patent troll" is criticized as vague and its use as subjective.[12]"

12 is a link to a tiny, short article where he is asking the question for debate over if a Patent Troll is bad. It being confusing is mentioned once in the tiny article "Here’s my working definition of the confusing term: Patent Troll." Now, I don't understand where this link gets "vague" or "subjective" from. Aside from the article asking for more clarification on what a Patent Troll is. But that is the point of the article. You can't strike up debate over what a Patent Troll is for your site if you begin with "Patent Troll is clearly defined."

I don't think this criticism should be on the page. It's ridiculous. The source is not credible. It'd be like me going to the The Dark Knight page and listing a criticism of the movie as "Some people do not think it is a movie" and then linking to a similar page with the topic "Is this a movie?" It's not an article, it's not an editorial, it's essentially a message board. It shouldn't be on Wikipedia. If anyone else can find someone confused over the term of a Patent Troll, then that should be allowed to stay. But until then, I say we delete it. Plus, it's a very large article up to that point, how can a criticism be that it is confusing? Anyone who read through this would know it's not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.230.214.207 (talk) 19:20, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Hoarding
Isn't the actual term "hoarding" and is it not the term found in the literature. "Troll" is something relatively new no doubt, and from internet culture. -Inowen (talk) 06:06, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Apple
Apple claiming to be a victim of patent trolls? Really? If that isn't the pot calling the kettle... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.205.44.26 (talk) 04:25, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

I added Apple suing HTC and some stupid "CleanerBot" vandalized it. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Patent_troll&type=revision&diff=966184885&oldid=966109946 It's false advertising to say "Anyone can edit" when bots go an screw the edits up. Apple copied swipe down notifications, you don't see Android suing them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.205.44.26 (talk • contribs)


 * You added a context-free sentence without a source. It was rightly removed. This is not a place to randomly list companies that have filed patent suits. - MrOllie (talk) 21:36, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Instead of vandalizing, you could have did this and got a link and put the link there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.205.44.26 (talk) 23:34, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 17 May 2021 and 31 July 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Sdca27, Stephen.defibaugh.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 06:12, 17 January 2022 (UTC)