Free
Message: Re: Re: Re: PACER Nikon et al
6
Dec 05, 2008 08:41AM
4
Dec 05, 2008 09:02AM
1
Dec 05, 2008 09:55AM
4
Dec 05, 2008 10:52AM

Re: Re: Re: PACER Nikon et al

posted on Dec 05, 2008 02:09PM

surprised DM doesn't want to go to Markman to get some judicial precedent established, but if the deal is big enough I guess there is no need.

I guess this way is better if the infringers will settle in about nine months or less, then our ability to collect is much faster, true with a trial and a jury we get much more but it takes two to three years and some of them will appeal, this way it is slam dunk with this economy cash is king, queen and every thing in between.

this way way if you name 10 to 20 each qtr they might settle within a qtr or so and we keep the ball rolling, and in two to three years we will be done with all of them and they can concentrate on their new business model.

FWIW JMHO


Dec 06, 2008 05:09AM
1
Dec 06, 2008 06:57PM
Share
New Message
Please login to post a reply