IMO, a lot of this depends on what you consider a "tweak".  In my mind, a "tweak" is a very minor adjustment - so minor that it doesn't warrant the word "adjustment" or any significant/real change of plans.  So does something so minor necessitate a change/amendment to the patents?  I doubt it, and the "tweak" may have been required due to the way in which they implemented the patented work in hardware (i.e., it wasn't the patent that needed the tweak, but how they put the thing together for the very first time).  Ever put together a swing set?  The stuff is all there, the plans are correct and reasonably understandable, but you will have to do some "tweaking" to get everything to line up just right.  This analogy is more apt when you again consider "how they put the thing together for the very first time".

You may be correct that this is what the Js are trying to work on, but then again it was a patent owner doing the tweaks that they are harping on, not the Js.  You're right in any case IMO - pretty weak!

JMHO, and I KNOW nuttin'!

SGE