That ruling is all fine and dandy in the fantasy world where a patent holder licenses the right or the product to an end user (who in turn sells a product with the licensed patented IP).

So what of the real world patent holder that never had the ability to price its IP to the licensee according to its likely functionality and usage after the initial license was sold?

This point has been brought up before by others, did the Court factor this in? Or will DM be able to go after all infringers (including downstream based on the fact that the upstream never got permission in the frst place)?