I'm glad you posted this pirate and I want to to make clear that this is an organized effort by several groups to further weaken the patent laws in this country. there is a bill that passed the house and is currently being looked at in the senate. Although the author of the propaganda cites some figures, they are misleading and many of her anecdotal stories about Las Vegas do not tell the whole story. The Vegas angle is because the annual electronics convention is going on right now. <br />1. Patents are highly complex to write and take several years and thousands in investment before one is allowed or granted. One "argues" the relevance and uniqueness of the invention over years in many cases after through searches are done to determine the invention does not infringe another patent and that the inventor is the first. It is absurd to conjecture that mounting a legal battle which is expensive and time consuming would be initiated without studying carefully what you think another infringed. The fact of the matter is: companies often develop software and systems to use in-house without performing due diligence to see if they are violating existing patent rights. Although I cannot spend the time to go into the infringement cases the article is referring to I can give you an example that you all will be aware of. If you have ever used <a href="http://amazon.com" rel="nofollow">amazon.com</a>, they developed a feature that saves their customers time and headaches in ordering. It's called "one click" and on the surface the programming is deceptively simple. Shortly after implementing the feature many other internet stores copied it sparking litigation with Barnes and Noble. In the end, regardless of all simple or elegant a solution, if you didn't come up with it first and protect it, you can't steal it. The one click feature is so important, it is a cornerstone to the success of Amazon. In the arguments the judges cited the fact that when B&N used the technology, the sales close rate went up significantly and so the increase in sales was due in large part to the stolen invention. <br />2. The author cites an increase in lawsuits over the last several years. This is true-but not due to increased "troll" activity. Non-practicing entities have always existed for the benefit of patent holders. think little guy who can't afford to manufacture the invention himself can sell his invention to a second party who figures out how to monetize it. This is fundamentally important to Objectivist thinking. not only regarding the moral basis of capitalism but also that man owns the products of his mind. Inventing is a legitimate livelihood. Without patents and therefore their protection, man would not have the ability to own the products of his mind. The increase litigation number of cases and judgement is a cyclical one, following a huge technological spurt from the late 90s -early 2000s. remember I said it takes years to get a patent. The smart phone "wars" you are seeing now are over technology developed some time ago. OVERALL PATENT LITIGATION RATES ARE STABLE. This directly from the former .head of the CAFC, the courts that hear all patent appeals and multiple other sources that study this seriously. <br />3. These efforts are funded by the large crony companies that do not want to legitimately compete in the marketplace with startups, pay their engineers what they're worth or pay an inventor for technology they want.