Talk:Vringo

Latest comment: 9 years ago by NorthBySouthBaranof in topic References

December 2009 reboot

edit

This article was pretty spammy in its previous incarnations but I've given it a fresh start here. Feedback welcomed, of course. A Traintalk 18:41, 5 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Patent Troll

edit

I believe someone needs to explain why they remove the patent troll part and the Ars Technica reference. Also, their relation to Vringo, Inc.82.77.106.135 (talk) 23:13, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply


References

edit

Not a patent troll?

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/08/after-years-of-hype-patent-troll-vringo-demolished-on-appeal/

http://www.businessinsider.com/vringo-patent-lawsuit-2012-11?op=1

http://venturebeat.com/2014/01/29/google-ordered-to-pay-as-much-as-1-billion-to-patent-troll-vringo/

http://www.smartcompany.com.au/growth/economy/32178-patent-trolls-attack-in-australia-with-court-case-against-local-arm-of-zte.html

http://www.valuewalk.com/2014/01/google-inc-goog-forced-to-pay-patent-troll-vringo-up-to-1b/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.12.179.96 (talk) 09:15, 22 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

We can note that a number of commentators describe it as a patent troll. Not all do, and the title is clearly a POV-laden pejorative. Among others, Reuters does not use the epithet: [1]. The term is properly noted in the lede of the article, but is not directly applied. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 10:52, 22 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
You're still pretty clueless, and your modifications are bad. Reuters is another category, of course. See also what I wrote here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:EdJohnston#Vringo 5.12.179.96 (talk) 11:10, 22 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
Welp, you're not going to gain consensus by calling me "clueless." Have a nice day. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 18:08, 22 March 2015 (UTC)Reply