Simba the "Tech King"
In a dimly lit conference room in Delaware, in the US, a lawyer in an expensive but somehow ill-fitting suit passes a USB drive across a polished table. “It contains a patent for ‘a method of transferring digital information from one location to another,'” he whispers. “We’ve already sent demand letters to 16,000 businesses that use email. The settlement sweet spot is exactly $1,200 per employee.” The recipient smiles, revealing teeth that are just a bit too perfect, like a shark that’s visited a cosmetic dentist. “Beautiful,” he says. “We’ll make millions without ever building a thing.”
This scene repeats itself daily across America, despite a decade of attempts to exterminate what former President Obama once described as entities that “don’t actually produce anything themselves, they’re just trying to essentially leverage and hijack somebody else’s idea and see if they can extort some money out of them.”
Welcome to the surprisingly resilient world of patent trolls, those special creatures who’ve adapted to every legal climate change with the tenacity of cockroaches at a nuclear test site.
From Bridge Dwellers to Bridge Builders (of Extortion)
The term “patent troll” originated in 1999 when Peter Detkin, then a lawyer at Intel Corporation, used it to describe companies with no products that brought what he believed were meritless patent suits. In a twist of irony that would make O. Henry weep with professional admiration, Detkin later co-founded Intellectual Ventures, widely regarded as the archetypal modern-day patent troll. It’s like Batman’s origin story, if instead of fighting crime, Bruce Wayne decided to become the Joker because the benefits package was better.
Patent trolls operate on a simple business model: acquire patents (often broad, vague, or of questionable validity), identify companies potentially infringing those patents, send threatening letters demanding licensing fees, and sue those who don’t comply. The economics are brutally effective – since patent litigation typically costs millions of dollars, most targets choose to settle for tens or hundreds of thousands rather than fight.
According to a White House report from 2013, patent trolls were filing 60% of all patent lawsuits in the United States, creating what economists politely termed “outsize costs to defendants and innovators at little risk to themselves.” In normal human language, this translates to “a business model built on legal extortion that would make Tony Soprano nod in professional respect.”
The Evolution of Trolldom: From Bridges to Bureaucracy
The earliest trolls were relatively straightforward creatures, sending crude demand letters and filing lawsuits in plaintiff-friendly jurisdictions like the Eastern District of Texas, which became to patent trolls what the Galápagos Islands were to Darwin’s finches – a perfect evolutionary laboratory where favorable conditions allowed strange and wonderful adaptations to flourish.
As Dr. Avery Cashgrabber from the Institute of Parasitic Legal Entities explains, “Patent trolls evolved sophisticated shell company structures that would make Russian oligarchs blush. Some evolved the ability to extract settlements from thousands of companies simultaneously, like a jellyfish with thousands of stinging tentacles, each connected to a different bank account.”
Consider the fascinating case uncovered by Judge Colm Connolly in Delaware. One patent troll called Nimitz Technologies LLC was supposedly owned by a man named Mark Hall, who, when questioned about the patent he allegedly owned, responded with the legal equivalent of “what patent?” When asked how he acquired the patent without paying money for it, Hall helpfully replied, “I wouldn’t be able to explain it very well. That would be a better question for Mavexar.”
In another case, the supposed “owner” of a patent trolling entity was a food-truck operator who had been promised “passive income” but was entitled to only a small portion of any revenue generated from the lawsuits. This is like hiring someone to be the CEO of Apple whose only qualification is making really good tacos and whose only responsibility is cashing much smaller checks than the real operators.
Legislative Whack-A-Troll: America’s Favorite Pastime
America has tried repeatedly to exterminate patent trolls through legislative and judicial means. The America Invents Act of 2011 introduced provisions specifically targeting troll tactics, including changes to joinder rules that prevented trolls from suing multiple unrelated companies in a single case.
The Supreme Court’s 2006 decision in eBay v. MercExchange limited trolls’ ability to obtain injunctions against alleged infringers. Writing in Forbes about this case, Jessica Holzer noted that the ruling “deals a blow to patent trolls, which are notorious for using the threat of permanent injunction to extort hefty fees in licensing negotiations.”
The 2017 Supreme Court case TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC further restricted venue shopping, requiring patent cases to be heard in the state where the defendant is incorporated. This was essentially the legal equivalent of telling the monsters they couldn’t hide under your favorite bed anymore – they’d have to choose a less comfortable bed elsewhere.
And yet, like the villain in a horror movie franchise, patent trolls keep coming back. As soon as one loophole is closed, they find another. The Federal Circuit’s March 2025 decision in Lashify, Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n opened a new door, making it easier for patent trolls to get their cases in front of the International Trade Commission, which can block imported products on an expedited timeframe.
The Troll’s Toolkit: Weaponizing Patents for Fun and Profit
The modern patent troll has evolved a sophisticated toolkit that makes their prehistoric bridge-dwelling ancestors look like amateurs. Their primary weapons include:
The Vague Patent Acquisition: Trolls typically purchase patents with claims so broad they could cover practically anything. “A method for displaying content on a screen” might as well be “a way to show stuff to eyeballs.”
The Threatening Letter Campaign: In 2014, the FTC found that MPHJ Technology Investments had sent letters to more than 16,000 small to mid-size businesses demanding licensing fees of $1,000 to $1,200 per employee while never making preparations for actual lawsuits. As Jordan Weissman, Chief Monetization Officer at Extort-o-Corp explains, “The beauty of our business model is that we don’t need to win in court—we just need targets to believe that paying us is cheaper than fighting us.”
The Shell Company Shuffle: Many trolls operate through a labyrinthine network of shell companies, making it difficult to determine who actually owns the patents. One investigation revealed that three companies with strange names – Mellaconic IP, Backertop Licensing, and Nimitz Technologies – were all linked to a single patent assertion company called IP Edge. It’s like a legal version of those cup games where you try to guess which shell has the ball, except all the shells are empty, and the ball is in the dealer’s pocket.
The Forum Shopping: Before TC Heartland restricted the practice, trolls would file lawsuits in courts known to be favorable to plaintiffs, particularly the Eastern District of Texas. Now they’re exploring new venues, including the International Trade Commission. It’s like a gourmand seeking out the restaurants with the most favorable health inspectors.
The Resistance: When Prey Fights Back
Not all targeted companies roll over. Some have developed impressive countermeasures against troll attacks:
Cloudflare not only beat patent troll Sable in court in February 2024 but also made Sable pay $225,000 and dedicate its entire patent portfolio to the public, ensuring those patents could never be used against another company. This is the legal equivalent of not just defeating the final boss but taking its weapons and melting them down into playground equipment.
Companies are increasingly using invalidation searches to identify prior art that can invalidate troll patents. This is like responding to “I have a patent on doors” by pulling out a cave painting showing Neanderthals using a hinged entrance.
Washington State Attorney General Bob Ferguson filed the first-ever enforcement action under the state’s Patent Troll Prevention Act against a company called Landmark Technology A, which had been sending threatening letters to small businesses demanding $65,000 in licensing fees.5 This is like watching a nature documentary where the zebras suddenly pull out assault rifles when the lions approach.
The Future of Trolling: Evolving Beyond Recognition
Patent trolls, like any successful parasite, are adapting to their changing environment. Dr. Maxwell Cookiemonster (who definitely exists and is not a figment of my caffeinated imagination) of the Institute for Advanced Legal Predation warns that the next generation of trolls will be even more sophisticated:
“We’re seeing trolls integrating AI to identify potential targets more efficiently. Some are exploring blockchain-based patent portfolios to obscure ownership further. Others are moving into international venues as U.S. courts become less hospitable. The modern troll is no longer just hiding under bridges—they’re rebuilding the entire transportation infrastructure.”
Recent Federal Circuit decisions like Lashify (2025) and Wuhan Healthgen (2025) have expanded access to the International Trade Commission for entities that previously couldn’t satisfy domestic industry requirements, potentially opening new hunting grounds for trolls.
Meanwhile, companies are developing increasingly sophisticated defenses. Patent invalidation services, defensive patent aggregators, and industry alliances are all working to counter troll tactics. It’s an arms race where the weapons are legal documents and the casualties are innovation and small business growth.
The Economic Toll of Trolling: More Than Just Money
The cost of patent trolling goes beyond the billions in direct legal costs and settlements. Studies have found that patent trolls are a burden on productive companies and stifle innovation, diverting resources from research and development to legal defense.
As one tech CEO who asked to remain anonymous (not because he fears retaliation but because his company’s PR team would have an aneurysm if he spoke honestly) put it: “For every dollar we spend fighting a troll, that’s a dollar we’re not spending on hiring engineers, improving our product, or developing new technologies. It’s like paying a tax for using technology that someone else claims they invented but never actually built.”
This chilling effect on innovation isn’t just theoretical. Companies become more cautious in their development processes, fearing accidental infringement. This environment slows down technological advancement as businesses focus more on legal safeguards than on pushing boundaries.
Epilogue: The Circle of Litigious Life
And so the dance continues. Trolls evolve, defenses adapt, and the legal system tries to keep pace. It’s a peculiarly American ecosystem where the predators and prey are locked in a slow-motion battle funded by billable hours.
As we reflect on the strange journey of patent trolls from their naming in 1999 to today’s sophisticated operations, one thing becomes clear: in a system designed to protect innovation, the most impressive innovation might be how trolls have weaponized that very system against the innovators it was meant to protect.
Next time you use email, scroll on a touchscreen, or click a “buy now” button, remember that somewhere, a patent troll might believe you owe them money for the privilege. And if that makes you uncomfortable, well, they probably have a patent on that feeling too.
Have you ever been targeted by a patent troll or know someone who has? Did your company develop any creative defenses against them? Share your troll tales in the comments below—just be careful not to admit to using any patented communication methods while doing so!
Enjoyed this dose of uncomfortable truth? This article is just one layer of the onion.
My new book, “The Subtle Art of Not Giving a Prompt,” is the definitive survival manual for the AI age. It’s a guide to thriving in a world of intelligent machines by first admitting everything you fear is wrong (and probably your fault).
If you want to stop panicking about AI and start using it as a tool for your own liberation, this is the book you need. Or you can listen to the audiobook for free on YouTube.
>> Get your copy now (eBook & Paperback available) <<
GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings