At last, software patent trolls are getting a smackdown. A few short months ago, the Supreme Court rendered an opinion in the case that has come to be known as Alice vs. CLS Banks. In that ruling, the Supremes held that taking an already widely-used practice, and moving it to a computer, does not create a new, patentable invention deserving of a software patent.

Patent trolls are the bane of nearly any tech business’ existence. While it is certainly true that there are patents that are infringed on, it is also true that a new breed of “business”, the extortion of money by companies whose sole business is to buy up patents, and then to use their patent portfolio to extort monies from companies – in other words, patent trolls – is burgeoning. These patent trolls demand amounts just below what they figure it will cost the target company – or themselves – to go to court, the theory being that the victim will roll over and pay rather than risk expensive litigation.

As the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) became more and more flooded with patent applications, what with the increase in emerging technologies, the dot.com bubble, the growth of Silicon Valleys, etc., to name but a few factors, they seemed to be unable to keep up with the glut of new patent applications and, many believe, their approval process became “approve them all, and let the courts sort them out.” Sort of the bureaucratic version of “kill them all and let God sort them out.” And to extend the analogy, a new St. Peter was born. Only, these entities were far from saints – in fact, they are trolls. Oh, excuse us – they are “Patent Assertion Entities”. Now, to be fair, there is a place for the legitimate Patent Assertion Entity (or “PAE”) – which is an organization whose business model is primarily the purchasing of patents and then the assertion of the rights attendant and pursuant to those patents. But many such outfits really do deserve the term “patent troll”.