Re: PACER Samsung
in response to
by
Message: Re: PACER Samsung
3
Jun 24, 2009 01:11AM
2
Jun 24, 2009 02:06AM
About 17 months ago I posted this: where I stated the following: Cell phones are the holy grail...in my opinion. Considering that they all have microphones and many utilize flash for record/playback (including voice memos and perhaps more commonly, voice-activated dial), it isn't difficult at all to see how such devices would be using technology directly out of the '774 and '737 patents at the very least. While doni (respectfully) likes to focus on the memory management aspects of e.Digital's IP, I have always thought that the more readily enforceable claims are the ones that are the easiest to understand and demonstrate - and should therefore be prosecuted first. If I can understand it, then surely DM does also. The IP I'm talking about here is right on the surface. The trick for DM is in presenting our case after making certain that it's ironclad. Hopefully that's exactly what they've been doing this past year - preparing an ironclad case (at least as much as it is possible). I still have many questions as to what the actual strategy will be but I'll simply have to wait for that to unfold... and I think that will be starting very soon. I don't doubt that DM/EDIG will ultimately be successful though. It's only a matter of when and for how much. Later that day LL chose to send me a PM in response. I’m betting he won’t care if I post it here since it doesn’t contain anything private or that hasn’t by now been discussed openly on the board. Here’s what he said: RP said they were not going to go after cell phones - that was some time ago but he definitely said it... I have obviously spent some considerable time in person with 3 of the edig people on multiple occasions so have heard a lot about this up until the time the healthcare effort stopped being supported. And so yesterday we got to see this little tidbit in Pacer Doc 162: 20 Accused Samsung Mobile Phones
Of which my entire point is that no matter what one thinks they may know for certain, the truth can change. Sometimes it changes for the worse but other times it changes for the better... which is why we all remain invested, isn’t it? We simply don’t know what is ultimately going to happen. With that, I think we should recognize that management doesn’t either... and respect the fact that they have chosen (right or wrong) to apparently heed DM’s advice and say as little as possible while they are working to monetize the company’s IP. Some are so certain about which details could not possibly cause problems for us down the line. I say just because you can’t imagine how some piece of information might be harmful to a case or settlement negotiation doesn’t mean that DM or someone else can’t. Better to remain silent than to possibly blow it on account of restless shareholders. While I feel like I’m on a roll here, I’d also like to comment on richardo’s statements... I can't see any settlement before the Markman ruling assuming it goes that far. There may be new filings, but probably no settlements.... Things have changed since then. Those who settled didn't know about Samsung holding out for a possible Markman hearing. I doubt those who settled were that concerned with Samsung’s plans if they were even fully formed back then - assuming they were privy to them at all. Regardless, I tend to think it’s DM pushing for Markman and hopefully not allowing Samsung to settle for nuisance value - giving Samsung no real alternative but to pay the big money now or attempt to whittle away at DM’s case... and this appears to be what they are doing given the last filing. You have to put your self in the position of being the company President and making the final decision to settle or not. I would not, pretty simple decision. Okay, you would not. Others would and have. In the case of very large corporations, I think principal falls by the wayside pretty fast in favor of a reasoned out cost/benefit analysis. Not in all cases of course (see digEcor), but in many I’m sure. So, you think some will settle before a filing and/or before a Markman Ruling? Yes or No? At this point there’s no doubt in my mind that there will be more filings and more settlements prior to the Markman hearing next February. silversurfer has recently stated he thought there would be more filings by October 1st and I had said a few days ago that I thought sometime in September - so our predictions are in perfect harmony. We couldn’t BOTH be wrong! - Sinkman
21 Recommendations
Loading...
Loading...
New Message
Please
login
to post a reply