Which is exactly what I did.Quote:
I will speak my opinion about it.
This particular case is over, they both played the game, one won, the other lost, so what.
No. The "battle" is over. The "war" will wage for a long time.
This crap is going to drag on for years... appeals and motions galore.
Okay. I didn't say it did.Quote:
Has nothing to do with any of those companies or this particular case.
You are right about "megacorporations" only acquiring patents as a defensive measure. Even Microsoft is surprisingly (to me) good about it.
To my mind though, this thread is about the broken patent system which allows "patent trolls" their game.
With that in mind, the acquisition of patents isn't a cost of doing business as "defensive patents" are useless against aggressive "patent trolls".
Unfortunately, the "patent trolls" are aware of the cost of litigation (Papers are published about this every year.); this knowledge allows them to set the cost of licensing just below the cost of litigation so all but the most powerful companies pay up rather than try to fight setting justification for the continued legitimacy of the patents in question. The unfortunate state means that validity of patents is tested not in court but in ransom because "patents trolls" have no real expenditures allowing all income from such licensing to be invested in the futures of litigation giving them a massive cache of resources solely dedicated to making such litigation more costly than the ransom.
A kind of "self-fulfilling prophesy" if you will.