Your argument requires one to summarily reject all of Yahoo's claims based on a preexisting ideological stance in regards to software patents.

For the sake of argument, let's assume Facebook is utilizing Yahoo's legitimate and innovative intellectual property. Then it's Facebook which is stifling innovation with IP theft.

In the history of Lockean property rights - from the settlement of North America to file sharing, the first step toward the appropriation of the property of others is invariably to claim that they have no legitimate ownership claim.

I agree. For whatever reason, they have been unable to innovate their way out of their current situation. However, not enforcing their patents, which already made them billions before, would just be against their fiduciary responsibility.

Points well taken. By no means am I trying to discredit what Yahoo has been able to accomplish in their long history on the web. Quite contrary, I'm suggesting that if they've been able to out innovate before than can do it once more. Nevertheless, I think by protecting an idea as abstract as a "Personalizable Profile Page" and then lying in wait until someone is on the verge of rendering you irrelevant in your field of play is bad sport. Facebook has been in existence since 2004 and if I remember correctly having a profile page has always been a part of the site as is the case for multiple sites (Monster.com, LinkedIn, MySpace, G+, all have "personalizable" profile pages) why not go after them while they're irrelevant? I just think its poor sportsmanship and largely will not bode well in the court of public opinion as many of Yahoo's consumers are likely also Facebook users.