||This article may be unbalanced towards certain viewpoints. (July 2012)|
As a traditional troll is said to collect a toll from those trying to cross a bridge, a trademark troll "magically appears when an unsuspecting producer adopts the same or similar mark and poses upon them two choices: pay to get a license to use my mark or litigate".
The existence of trademark trolls exemplifies a common misunderstanding about trademark rights: the mere registration of a mark does not give the trademark owner a monopoly over that mark but must be used in commerce. As a consequence, while Leo Stoller, who has been labelled a "prototypical trademark troll" by intellectual property attorney Anna B. Folgers, had brought 47 trademark infringement suits as of 2007[update], no court had found any infringement and the Northern District of Illinois had enjoined him from filing new actions without the court’s permission. In a similar manner, the business practices of Tim Langdell of Edge Games were referred to as trolling by the US District Court after it was found that there was no evidence of commercial use of the asserted marks but that there was instead evidence that Langdell had fraudulently obtained and/or maintained many of his registrations.
Another more targeted example in 2008 involved Never Give Up Limited claiming that they owned the brands of two fruit juice chains, Juiceling in Glasgow and Juiced Up in Edinburgh. According to undercover reporting by the BBC, Never Give Up's representative, John Blanchard, sought tens of thousands of pounds to sell the trademarks back.
- Folgers, Anna (Fall 2007). "The Seventh Circuit’s Approach to Deterring the Trademark Troll: Say Goodbye to Your Registration and Pay the Costs of Litigation" (PDF). Seventh Circuit Review: 39. Retrieved 2009-02-20.
- Edge Games, Inc. v. Electronic Arts Inc., ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION by Judge William Alsup
- Trademark scam targets businesses