Comments on: Patent troll

By: pjcamp

pjcamp — Wed, 04 Jul 2012 03:09:00 +0000

Patent troll got no pants.

By: RedShirt77

RedShirt77 — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 14:28:00 +0000

I was going say, 1997? All makes sense now.

Also these acre clearly troll patents and not patent trolls.

By: Max Allan

Max Allan — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 13:07:00 +0000

I like “FIG. 6″.
I think there are troll lures, someone has certainly gone to a lot of effort to patent one anyway, I can’t believe they wouldn’t then make some.
Myself, I would have thought it more effective to have troll food on the lure, rather than another troll, but maybe they are cannibalistic.

By: Ambiguity

Ambiguity — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 12:56:00 +0000

Makes more sense in the context of the full patent. It's a lure. I wish there really were troll lures.

By: Over the River

Over the River — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 12:28:00 +0000

As the legal copyright holder of the doll known as “Troll” I must insist…

Happy July!