If Russell Fish's testimony is by his taped deposition (is it?) then how could PTSC attorneys, or the jurors, ask questions?

Questions like:

Mr. Fish, how much were you paid for you part of the patents? (several million $)

Mr. Fish, what percentage ownership of what is now MMP did you own and that you sold for that sum, about 20 years ago?

Mr. Fish, why did you subsequently seek extra compensation? (because I later thought it was worth more)

Mr. Fish, how much is HTC paying you, or any entity in which you have an interest, for your participation in this litigation?

Mr. Fish, have you or any entity in which you have an interest received direct or indirect compensation from any other person or entity for your participation?

Mr. Fish, do you believe your now patented design is a major contributor to the processing speeds of today's computers and other intelligent electronic devices?

Mr. Fish, how would you characterize your relationship with Mr. Moore at the time Helmut Falk became involved in financing the development and marketing of early chips using "the Fish clock", during which time Mr. Falk paid you and others to debug and complete the design of the early chips? Were you and Mr. Moore in agreement as to the then future direction for monetizing your inventions?

Mr. Fish, would you say that your presence and testimony today is in any way influenced by your current or past relationship with Mr. Moore? If so, in what way?

Just some thoughts. It will very interesting to hear why HTC feels Mr. Fish's testimony is to their benefit, and how Mr. Otteson reacts to it.