After all, if Blackboard didn't get the patent first, some other company would, and Blackboard would be the one infringing.
All of these problems would go away if patents were awarded properly.
If Blackboard is behaving badly, then yes, we should blame them for bad behavior. Abusing the patent system, and lawyering your competitors to death in a frivolous patent suit is nasty, low, bad for the customer, and should result in karmic consequences (but karma, unfortunately, is not as effective or quick as it is on TV). At the very least, the "bad for the customer" bit ought to be a sin in any business mans book. If it isn't, the business deserves to die...and probably will, eventually. SCOX isn't doing so well these days, for example (not that they were exactly swimming in success before becoming evil, but it certainly hastened their demise).
After all, if Blackboard didn't get the patent first, some other company would, and Blackboard would be the one infringing.
That argument is along the same lines as not convicting a hitman for accepting a hit on someone by rationalizing that if he didn't kill the victim, the business would just go to some other hitman. I think convicting whichever hitman accepted the assignment is reasonable, don't you?
> After all, if Blackboard didn't get the patent first, some other company would, and Blackboard would be the one infringing.
Owning the patent is one forgiveable - If I were them I would want the patent too for self-defence. What is indefensible is aggressive litigating over that patent to scare competitors.