Litigation is notoriously risky; the cost of settling is usually orders of magnitude less than the gain of winning. In that respect, it resembles the kind of thing insurers specialize in. So this is simply a specialist insurer, whose USP is that if they think they can invalidate a patent, they go for it.
I'd have thought that deterring patent trolls is the opposite of what they ought to do; I imagine something more like a honeypot operation - every effort is taken to ensure members look just like ordinary marks and suckers.
It could cause strains if someone came after a member with a valid patent. The club would decline their claim, they'd have to settle and redesign their product, and they might go bust.
this makes sense to me - pay a premium each month, get protected from trolls. Up to the insurer whether to pay the "licence fee" or fight them in court, and they can make that decision on behalf of all their customers.
Litigation is notoriously risky; the cost of settling is usually orders of magnitude less than the gain of winning. In that respect, it resembles the kind of thing insurers specialize in. So this is simply a specialist insurer, whose USP is that if they think they can invalidate a patent, they go for it.
I'd have thought that deterring patent trolls is the opposite of what they ought to do; I imagine something more like a honeypot operation - every effort is taken to ensure members look just like ordinary marks and suckers.
It could cause strains if someone came after a member with a valid patent. The club would decline their claim, they'd have to settle and redesign their product, and they might go bust.