I agree the Hitler comparison is absurd, but I think the whole "I'm gonna patent this obvious concept, not do anything with it, and then sue everyone who comes up with the idea independently while actually making an attempt to solve the problem in practice" is sort of evil.
It's the unfortunate logical conclusion of our private property philosophy applied to intellectual capital. I'd like to see some sort of 'use it or lose it' clause enshrined at the core of property law, but obviously that approach could bring its own problems.
Well, with real property there are things like adverse possession [1]. This isn't exactly "use it or lose it", but it does contain the idea that if rights aren't exercised there may be implicit acquiescence to another's actions.
