I wrote those replies on my phone; I wasn't aware that the plaintiff was an actual operating company. I am aware of what a patent troll is - but it doesn't really matter, which is the point I was trying to make. Even if the plaintiff were a patent troll, the questions about Kickstarter's legal role are valid ones.
I'm also aware that this is not a copyright case, but contributory liability exists in patent land too, and courts often treat copyright contributory liability cases as applicable to patent contributory liability because the differences between copyright and patent are not really germane to the principle. The flea market's culpability is not affected by whether the kid is selling pirated music CDs or pirated 3D printers.
As for whether Kickstarter is like a flea market ... I honestly don't know. The eBay comparison is a good one, I think, and while eBay has also been sued on these grounds, I don't know if those cases have been decided. But it makes total sense for Kickstarter to be sued also. It isn't just name dropping; they're the ones with the money. How big a licensing fee, or damage judgment, are you really going to get out of some folks at MIT? And we don't know if Kickstarter is innocent here. What do their internal communications look like regarding infringing stuff on their marketplace? I'm sure we'd all love to believe that they're totally kosher, but they might not be, and suing Kickstarter is the only way to find out.