iMessage came out in 2011, and was likely in development much earlier. this company incorporated in 2015. So, I understand what you are saying and it is why I n

iMessage came out in 2011, and was likely in development much earlier. this company incorporated in 2015. So, I understand what you are saying and it is why I noted problems with any one factor being used, but summarizing and adding what I said above: * company does not have a product using the technology. * company has not existed longer than the product infringing on their technology, and is not a whollly owned (or largely owned) subsidiary of another company. * company is suiing for a sum larger than its own market cap. * company wants an injunction placed on the "infringing" technology & ops. * company awarded a sum 3x its market cap and is asking for a sum close to its market cap on top of that. So, yes, I get it and noted it in a different comment, age and marekt cap alone would be bad for startups and imperfect metrics. I believe that if you consider the above points, there is a way to create scale/filter for trolls that would allow "real" companies to actually operate. If a company has no product, and its primary source of revenue is from direct litigation and settlements, is new/has recently restructured itself, is a public company with highly consolidated holdings, and is a patent troll, it should be considered a patent troll. edit: I was incorrect, they IPOd in 2015. They started suing apple(or the article I read referenced the suit) as early as 2013 so they are in fact older.