You are talking about enraging the troll, but have you thought about enraging the judge with your actions?
Don't get me wrong, I admire your deeds, but sometimes good intentions can lead to unintended consequences and make things worse.
And if the word "murder" appeared in the "arguments", it is fair to remember the problem of collateral damage. Who cares about a couple of hostages shot if a culprit is punished? Right?
So the other parts of the real world not being fair is your argument for troll victims to cave in and not to fight back? Strawman #7.
The funny thing is that all the arguments in this boilerplate response are 100% valid from the common sense viewpoint. Unlike the opposing ones. Thanks for the nice summary.
I AM a creator. How can I hate myself?
I did not know that Franz Kafka wrote in Portuguese...
I thought Franz Kafka was a Bohemian writer, not Belgian.
Another interesting (and ironic) point: at the end of Mr. Gannon's article there is a section "Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)" with two links. I'm absolutely sure that this piece of software first generates e-mails to authors of those possibly related posts and prompts them to assert their consent. Otherwise shame to the programmer!
The explanation is simple: Mr. Gannon was asked about linking to his article just once, maybe twice. If he was overwhelmed with stupid messages like Nina P., he would change his views quickly.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: So what is a "reasonable model"?
I know what strawman is, and I admit that I applied it wrongly in this particular case.
But your entire logic is a strawman: we say that the business model of trolls is questionable/immoral/flawed, you wrongly associate this problem with whether people can be accused based on IP and trying to disprove that, creating an impression that copyright trolls are decent folks worrying about copyright protection. And your liberal comparison of civil vices to criminal actions is 100% strawman.
I also puzzled by you use of the term "guilty" here: first, it is not applicable to civil cases, and second, I though only court can conclude that a person is guilty/liable.