recently and now after reading the article you just posted, do you, Nathan Hale, SGE, Kid, Greeneyes etc.etc think that the defendants will try and discredit us based on the invalidity approach of prior art and do they stand a chance in your collective opinions?

I know Nathan has weighed in on the 584 and the "prior art" that has been cited.  According to his analysis (Thank you So Much) sounds like Nathan believes the 584 is "original" in it's design.  Are we golden on the 336 and the 148 as I believe?  Just need a little reassurance after ronran mentioned Forgent and after reading this article.  Just don't want any of us to be blind sited.

While I never invested in Forg, I was surprised to see the defendants stipulate to infringement and then win the Trial on the basis of Forgents patents NOT being valid.

Ron brought this up with the intention of bringing to Balance to our one sided thinking at times.

I know that we've all agreed that the CC rulings appeared to be overwhelmingly in OUR favor but what about the "invalidity" thing?

I'd appreciated the more knowledgeable giving their opinions on this.

TIA

Deb