While that sheds some light on liability, don't you find it odd that it would be DT requesting the nullity and not a phone manufacturer if indeed it has to do with mobile phones, or perhaps a set top box manufacturer or, server manufacturer and so on......... DT uses other people's stuff. One could presume they get all their suppliers to provide the necessary statement to keep them off the hook.

And if not spurred by litigation, (we are not aware of any), what is the motive as opposed to just keep pushing it off onto their suppliers?

Opty