PTSC wanted it to mean moving in the same direction excluding any correlation between the speed change eithe relative or absolute. Judge Ward imposed a limitation ans included ralative change.

Additionally he also did not accept the Active Area defintion but chose to include theentire top surface

These two I beleiev allow for easy proof of non-infringenment. The top surface was noted by cook as indicating that by simply increasing the size of the inactive area the 50% limitation can be bypassed.

And as for the proportinality of teh change this is very much what teh J3+Arm wanted and spent an awful lot of time trying to convice the Judge that the change in speed was not only directional but also relative.

based on this construction if a 50% slowdown causes less than a 50% slow down in processing speed then there is no infringement since the 2 are not ( in Judge Ward's terminology) varying together.

So if I am feeding fuel into an engine at the rate of 100 cc per minute and the engine is turning at 1000 revolutions per minute then if I drop the fuel feed to 50 cc per minute and the engine revolves at > 500 rpm then in Ward's terms they are not varying together since only the direction has changed but the change is not proportional.

Now I am not an engineer but i would imagine that as there is always some benefit lost when more power is added then when power is remomved there is generally not a proportional drop in ouput (work)

that is why we have an optimal speed limit of 55 or 65 and that to accelerate from 40 to 50 and 50 to 60 takes less additional input than accelarating from 60 to 70 and teh same goes for maintaining speed. since there will be friction maintaining a speed of 70 mph might use more energy than maintaining a speed of 60 mph and so if the cock rate drops then the processing rate might also drop and while that rate of drop migt be close to proportional chances are that there are efficiencies gained at slower speed and the clock and processing speed change might not be proportional.

Of course this is might only be my unrealistic and incorrect understanding since I am neither and EE or Physicist or scientist.

Oh well I'm still holding so GLTA