I sat down and wrote a long page on the NON-ISSUE of whether or not DM shall represent EDIG in 50 or more cases and bail out on others. Just before it ended we had a power failure and my Internet connection failed...

Just got the power back. Of course you are right that "DM conntrol EVERY THING LEGAL" EVERYTHING LEGAL, ( and I add MONETARY). For God's sake EDIG gave DM a Lien all the Patents to secure their contingency Fee Agreement.

Those who have seen DM succeed beyond their limited immagination, are planting the seeds of doubt in the investor's mind by implying that DM may bail out when it comes to BIGGIE defendants as they may be their clients. This is absurd.

DM took a year studying if EDIG was worth getting invloved with. They had a Committee of their Senior partners study all issue that might come up, and made sure it had at least a 75% chance of being a success for the LAW FIRM before they got involved with it...

And when they gave the green light to represent EDIG they went ALL THE WAY. They agreed to pay all thr costs up front to make the case a success...

It is silly to think that DM did not consider the issue pof any conflict of interest that might arise. during that year of studing their involment with EDIG...

The language put out by company that DM may be forced to decline representation only in cases where the prospective infringer-defendant is a CURRENT client of DM, makes it amply clear that DM during that whole year of considering their representation of EDIG must have gotten rid of a lot of clients who would not remain as "CURRENT CLIENTS" of DM...

Lastly, it is clear to me that EDIG convinced DM they would get a LOT OF MONEY, which would make it worth their while to stick their collective necks and money out to prosecute this case, otherwise they would not sign on as they did...

As EDIG attorneys they have to resprent EDIG against any and all infringers, BIG, SMALL or otherwise. The only out is any "Current clients" of DM. And that means "Current at the time they signed the representation agreement". Thus, they can't sign UP to represnt APPLE in anything if approached, because they would be held to a "Reasonable man (Lawyer) standard" of expecting that Apple would be and EDIG infringer claim...

Gil...