First of all, it’s not clear that they could have taken this to trial, as the judge didn’t see a basis for argument (that’s what summary judgment means). Secon

First of all, it’s not clear that they could have taken this to trial, as the judge didn’t see a basis for argument (that’s what summary judgment means). Second, there is no legal theory or precedent that I’m aware of that would factor in the troll-ish nature of the plaintiff in a patent ruling. Patent trolls lose because they are usually stretching to apply vague patent claims to a large number of targets. Finally, trolls have a heavily uneven playing field. Most troll farms have in-house counsel, so they have very low litigation costs. Also, they typically segregate every patent or patent family into a separate corporate entity so that any fee or damage awards won’t claw back overall winnings.