Patent trolls are parasites looking for easy money. If Newegg is signaling that no money from them is easy, then that seems to be the best way to fend off all the lawsuits, no matter the level of perceived merit.
That wouldn't be true in the sort of patent lawsuit where somebody is defending against an existential threat. But when you're trying to influence a cost/benefit calculation, signaling "we will maximize your costs and maybe we will sink your whole operation" seems like a great way to get the extortionists to move on to other targets.
"If Newegg is signaling that no money from them is easy, then that seems to be the best way to fend off all the lawsuits, no matter the level of perceived merit."
I get your point but would you agree that otoh it is entirely possible that a patent troll might decide to take them on in order to show that they won't go away easy as well? (variation of a Moral hazard?)
Additionally we don't really have complete data on every demand made by trolls it's not as if someone who decides to settle (and/or the patent troll) is publicly disclosing all agreements made prior to legal action, right?
We only know about when lawsuits are filed and settled. We don't know about someone settling before a suit is filed at all.
As an example a domain owner might have a publicly stated policy that they will never turn over a domain when someone comes calling even if they file a lawsuit UDRP etc. And in fact there are people that do this (google rick schwartz domain king). But how do we know the times that Mr. XYZ gets approached and does settle? It wouldn't be in his interest to tell the world about that and he could easily have an agreement with the other company that he will only agree if they don't disclose the info.
I don't think that's the case. Trolls don't have to sue anybody in particular. But they have a strong incentive to be able to win any case they start, because, as with this story, a loss can eliminate future shakedowns.
Patent trolls are parasites looking for easy money. If Newegg is signaling that no money from them is easy, then that seems to be the best way to fend off all the lawsuits, no matter the level of perceived merit.
That wouldn't be true in the sort of patent lawsuit where somebody is defending against an existential threat. But when you're trying to influence a cost/benefit calculation, signaling "we will maximize your costs and maybe we will sink your whole operation" seems like a great way to get the extortionists to move on to other targets.