Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Patent Law Blogs -> IPBiz

Patent Law

: IPBiz

In a Sikahema move, R. Ebert labels A. White a troll

By Lawrence B. Ebert, Esq.

In the movie review business, a contrarian can be labelled a ?troll,? an Internet term for someone whose intent is to provoke others. In the patent law business, a troll can include a patent holder, who does not make product, who sues an infringer, who does.
Likely, a side impact of the lawsuit is to "provoke" the accused infringer.

The linked story describes how Roger Ebert, movie critic, labelled Armond White, another movie critic a troll.

But wait, there was a Sikahema here. As described in the post Ebert Calls New York Press Critic Armond White a Troll:

Enter Ebert, who has become the de facto champion of criticism by being the most famous critic alive. He wrote a blog post titled ?In Defense of Armond White? on Thursday night. In it Ebert explained how the Tomatometer isn?t a measure of quality (and he?s right), but that White shouldn?t be taken to task for having a passionate opinion or for upsetting the sanctity of the 100% score. However, White invoking the foreign film You, the Living prompted a ?WTF?? from the 67-year-old writer. Ebert concluded the entry by writing, ?Armond White was pretty much on the money.?

Well, until this morning when Ebert updated his post withdrawing his defense. Someone pointed out White?s voting history, causing Ebert to rethink his stance. Here?s a quote from the blog post, ?It is baffling to me that a critic could praise Transformers 2 but not Synecdoche, NY. Or Death Race but not There Will be Blood. I am forced to conclude that White is, as charged, a troll. A smart and knowing one, but a troll. My defense of his specific review of ?District 9? still stands.?

Elsewhere in the post by Leins:

What?s worse is he rarely backs up these arguments with anything substantial, instead resorting to seemingly random art house comparisons and bitter insults.

Well, they ARE movies (not patents), and perhaps Iron Man speaks more to an ?infantilized culture? than to anything substantial.

Full post as published by IPBiz on August 15, 2009 (boomark / email).