1E9Ct5D

Therefore, it is important to bear in mind that a patent is property, subject to all the relevantconstitutional protections. The basic premise of patent law is that, in exchange fordisclosing an invention publicly, the inventor receives a property right that excludes othersfrom using the invention without the inventor’s permission.To date, that property right does not vary depending on what category of person owns thepatent, e.g., troll or non-troll. Lessening a property right for some and not others presents aformidable legislative drafting problem. Exemplifying this problem is a quote from JudgeSue Robinson of the Federal District Court in Delaware, which decides many patent cases:With respect to the characterization of [Plaintiff] Cradle IP as ‘simply alitigation vehicle for Cradle Technologies,’ many businesses andacademic institutions enforce their patent rights through privatecompanies (like Cradle IP); such a business strategy is not nefarious.The court declines to treat such non-practicing entities as anythingless than holders of constitutionally protected property rights, thoserights having been legitimized by the Patent & Trademark Office. 30B. Difficulty #2: Defining Trolls.In general, trolls are defined as non-practicing entities that “do not manufacture products,but instead hold licenses to numerous patents, which they license and enforce againstalleged infringers.” 31This definition has its problems, because it would include, for30 Cradle IP, LLC v. Tex. Instruments, LLC, Case No. 1:11-cv-01254-SLR, Feb. 13, 2013, Order onDefendant’s Motion to transfer, at *4.31 Taurus IP, LLC v. Daimler Chrysler Corp. et al., 519 F. Supp. 2d 905, 911 (W.D. Wis. 2007).10951932.2 17