I would advocate replacing the current practice of corporations being legally required to act in the best interests of shareholders only with a new hierarchy or rules, much like Asimov's laws if you will:
First, a corporation must act reasonably in the best interest of the general public.
Second, a corporation must act reasonably in the best interest of their employees where it doesn't conflict with the first rule.
Third, a corporation must act reasonably in the best interest of their shareholders where that doesn't conflict with the first or second rule.
A corporation jacks up the price of a generic drug by 7,000,000%? Sued by the general public.
A corporation informs employees that they will have to train their H1B replacements? Sued by their employees.
A corporation pays its CEO an unreasonably large salary with no evidence that that results in better executive performance? Sued by their shareholders. (This should be happening now...)
I like it better than a corporate death penalty, because many corporations do have value and importance to the general public that would be at risk of being destroyed because of a single bad acting CEO. With this scheme, the courts would have a framework for redressing these issues.
In the case of patent trolls, some patents are more obviously bullshit then others. The more obviously bullshit the patent, the more strong a case members of the general public would have to individually sue the trolls for obstructing their use of the technology. What if everybody who uses HTTPS could sue these clowns?