> ...if MSFT gets royalties from these patents it would be irresponsible (to their shareholders, and employees) for them to ditch them...
Continuing that logic, it would be irresponsible not to defend this patent's revenue in court. Irresponsible not to use the most advantageous court for that (i.e. East Texas). Irresponsible to campaign in such a way that might invalidate that patent as it would deprive them of a valuable asset. Irresponsible not to reinvest some of the revenue these parent's generate into lobbyists to protect that revenue stream and asset.
So responsibly to investors again results in a tragedy of the commons. This time in patent litigation and legislation
If you want that to change, support changes in patent law. You can't expect any company to act against its own self interest while other companies take full advantage of the system.
In other words, don't hate the player; hate the game.
If you play the game you end up with an interest in the game continuing to exist.
If you play the game because you have to while working to destroy it, that is one thing. If you play the game and lobby against the destruction of the game, you are the problem.
Continuing that logic, it would be irresponsible not to defend this patent's revenue in court. Irresponsible not to use the most advantageous court for that (i.e. East Texas). Irresponsible to campaign in such a way that might invalidate that patent as it would deprive them of a valuable asset. Irresponsible not to reinvest some of the revenue these parent's generate into lobbyists to protect that revenue stream and asset.
So responsibly to investors again results in a tragedy of the commons. This time in patent litigation and legislation