Ordinarily, I try to stay away from posts the main purpose of which is to "Snipe" at other posters. I make an exception this time becuase of my high respect for you, and because the last paragraph of your post has no basis in fact, and it is contrary to the understanding and objectives of EDIG...

You say:..." Tell me how many of the 174 "potential" infringers you think we will see a ruling in our favor? I think many would be overwhelmed if we win 25% of the total, of course if we embellish the number we may win all 174 identified infringers; I guess that would be more realistic according to you."...

I am certain the company understading is that the number of infringers is much more higher than 87, or 25% of those identified by Nanully. And, although it is clear that all identified infringers by Nanully are "Potential" till the Supreme Court of United States says otherwise, the incessant jousting on this point is begining to wear thin and unravell the civility we have worked hard to maintain on this board...

I do not recall the company PR stating Nanully had identified 174 "Potential infringers". And, until they say so DABOSS can say "Infringers" if he chooses to do so...

CAN WE ALL JUST GET ALONG TILL SUNPOOP'S BASH?...

Respectfully...

Gil...