but I am trying to use REASONABLE LOGIC here regarding the LG settlement.....Granted it may structured in a way that not only will confuse us, the shareholders, but will have the same result to other, not yet settled, infringers.

However, EDig has bona fide patents dealing with flash memory. They had these patents well before flash memory had become big on the scene, at least 4 years so there was NO COMPETITION or prior art for those patents.

DM was hired ON CONTINGENCY to legally pursue those companies that were using EDig's IP illegally. DM is a top notch law firm, one of the better IP firms in the world and very expensive. Before signing on with EDig they most assuridly did their due diligence to see what they could be getting into and decided this was very definitely a pursuit that could be very lucrative to them.

DM is not parterned with EDig to be magnamimous and help them out, THEY ARE IN THIS TO MAKE MONEY, BIG TIME MONEY.....

DM has stated on its website they do not generally take cases on contingency but when they do they evaluate their chances and if, in their opinion, there is not at least a 75% chance of legally prevailing then they will not become involved.

All that "beating a dead horse" HAS TO SAY TO ANYONE the LG settlement is not and cannot be "small"

LG is one of the biggest companies in the world. DM would certainly not let LG walk out the door paying them a "pittance" Why bother? LG "settled" first. EVen with a discount for being first the settlement figure arrived at would not be so low as to not even pay DM expenses. It would also not be so low as to create a "bench mark" or "guideline" for the other infringers to demand as their settlement.

There is nothing about the LG settlement that leads me to believe it is meaningless and I am chastising all you "doubting Thomases" out there to not lose sight of reality.