So I was listening to the radio and heard this story about how this one guy is going around being a patent troll. But this part baffles me, how can you sue for his idea? His patent was according to the article:

"interact with the internet and your preferences to pull down, to your personal player, all the personal stuff you wanted to listen to. "

"The idea of downloading playlists to your audio player and podcasts are how the world has gotten around to implementing those ideas," says Logan.

But what, I don't even. This literally has me fuming because A. I hate patent trolls, and B. This isn't even REMOTELY similar because his patent is so vague that it covers basically 'That thing that can do the stuff.'

Article in question: http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2013/06/05/188719954/how-one-patent-could-take-down-one-comedian

Discuss opinions?

Not really much to discuss. The guy is a troll, and any court he goes to is going to laugh at him and his lawsuit, and probably fine him for frivolous lawsuits. People like this deserve the worst that life throws at them ><

I agree they do, but he sued Apple and the court sided with him. How is this fair though? I don't THINK a lot of podcasts make money aside from donations. (I'm pretty unfamiliar with how most Podcast makers work.) So it has me nervous the courts might actually side WITH him. Apparently in the eyes of the law he has a legit claim, but in reality he's just going around trying to squeeze blood from stones here. (Conveniently picking notable podcasts (I think they might be, so don't quote me on the accuracy.))

Americans and their "sue anything with a pulse because we feels like it" society, thanks for exporting it to the UK and elsewhere.