InvestorsHub Logo

nyt

08/07/19 9:32 PM

#82952 RE: Noitall1 #82951

Ridiculous. #1, you can't be a patent troll w/o being a patent owner. #2, vplm bought the patents, then tried to sell, then sue. They did nothing else but that. They "SAID" (lied) they were going to USE them in their voip platform BUT DIDN'T (they lied).

So to recap: vplm BOUGHT, tried to sell UNSUCCESSFULLY, then began SUING.

THAT IS THE DEFINITION OF A PATENT TROLL.
BUY/SELL/SUE BUY/SELL/SUE BUY/SELL/SUE

There is NO OTHER definition of a patent troll...

Buy sell sue buy sell sue buy sell sue

Actually vplm is step beyond your avg garden variety patent troll. They are a SUPER TROLL!

The difference being....regular patent trolls buy up patents and sell or sue for infringement. Vplm bought the patents, then IMMEDIATELY (check the record) BEGAN ITS CAMPAIGN OF TELLING ALL THEIR SHAREHOLDER AND POTENTIAL SHAREHOLDERS, THAT THEY WOULD NOW FOLD THE PATENTS INTO THEIR ALREADY EXISTING (for about 10 yrs) voip service providing platform, which would propel them to the top of the industry & garner hundreds of millions of new subscribers.

THERE'S your DIFFERENCE!