Summary: RPX, whose top executives are leaving and business is gradually dying, might end up as another 'asset' of patent trolls

TECHRIGHTS has been writing many articles about RPX, which marketed itself as "against trolls" even though its members were often troll feeders.

Last night IAM was exited to say that a patent troll might buy RPX; "Big news on RPX," IAM said, "management talking to interested parties in early stages of process that could lead to sale. Microsoft opts not to renew membership #IP #patents..."

We wrote about Microsoft joining RPX a very long time ago and now it exits. From IAM's blog post about it: (obviously not mentioning the "T" word)

The management of RPX is meeting with a number of interested parties in a process that might lead to an eventual sale of the business, IAM understands. It is believed that an investment consortium led by IP monetisation specialist Erich Spangenberg is among those eyeing the defensive aggregator. Others to have been linked with a possible deal include Vector Capital, the private equity fund that owns IPValue and arguably knows the space as well as any buyout shop. It’s not clear if former CEO John Amster is involved in the process (he, Vector and Erich Spangenberg declined to comment for this article). RPX is being advised by GCA, which bills itself as an independent investment bank focused on the growth sectors of the global economy.

If RPX ends up in the hands of these notorious patent trolls, IAM will love it even more. IAM is, after all, the loudest proponent of trolls (along with Watchtroll) bar trolls themselves. IAM is their platform of choice. Years ago we took note of MOSAID/Conversant (classic patent troll) paying IAM and yesterday IAM produced an 'article' which basically amplifies Conversant (Boris Teksler). IAM now speaks to literal patent trolls for their advice on patent tax. From the blog post:

In order to find out, Lew Zaretzki of Hamilton IPV, and Conversant CEO Boris Teksler delved into the decisions handed down by the High Court in London and the US Central District of California Court, in combination with looking at the Court of Justice of the European Union’s 2015 decision in Huawei v ZTE and the approach to SEP/FRAND issues employed by the Chinese authorities and courts.

For those who wonder why we keep linking to sites like Watchtroll and IAM, well... we think it's important to keep abreast of what patent trolls are up to and what better source of leads than the trolls' proponents themselves. We may not share their views, but we certainly need to know what they're up to. ⬆