Free
Message: Re: Fun with Numbers...sinkman...
6
Aug 22, 2009 03:51PM
4
Aug 22, 2009 06:29PM
3
Aug 22, 2009 06:43PM
1
Aug 22, 2009 06:52PM
1
Aug 22, 2009 06:57PM

I followed through your post till we got to, "So now we’re at $50M", all through nodding and mumblig umho, ahhah, O.K!?...

Then I got to, "except that we settled. What now? Half of that? Personally I’d have to say that it’s more likely that an early settlement meant just 1 tenth of 1 percent - or $5 million total."

My Umhuph, Ahhah,turned in to NO WAY, TOTALLY UNREASONABLE AND UNREALISTIC"...

FIRST:

Assuming at least 1 billion in actual infringing products, (and this number is quite realistic, based on the number of cell phones, cameras, etc. that if you pull the SD card they fail to operate), there is no rational basis for DM to reduce his DEMAND for damages to 1/10th of 1/100 of THE DOLLAR VALUE of the total dollars earned by SAMSUNG infringing on EDIG technology...

Why is a mere "Nuiscance Value payment", and there is no indication that SAMSUNG winning this case, and DM was quivering in his booths and made EDIG accept a nuisance value settlement...

SECOND:

there is no rational basis for the FLASH community to assume that EDIG PATENTS have and VALIDITY to them if indeed DM is accepting a paltry $5 million for a case that he thought to be his CHOICE to go go to Markman Hearing and beyond, and then he cases in and accepts $5 million from his STAR INFRINGER who had made $5 Billion infringing on EDIG patents and are getting AWAY with it...

Damages have to have some rational basis to the actual harm done to a plaintiff. And although it is the plaintiff's responsibility to convince a trier of the fact of the reasonableness of the amount of the damages sought, there has to be some rational basis to the game...

If you claim SAMSUNG made $5 Billion which they could not have made withouth infringinging on your Patents, the question of how much you are entitled to out of the $5 Billion is one of fact to be decided by the trier of the FACTS. And towrd that end you are entitled to show through testimony and other evidence what your "Expectaions" were, and were they consistent with the practice in the field...

That is why raised the issue of EDIG having expected to get $14 dollars for every unit sold by Samsung that actually infrinbged on its IP...

And I believe DM is quite intune with how this game is played, so I can safely say your

1/10 of 1/100, or $5 million settlement is not going to be the case...

Gil...


Aug 22, 2009 07:59PM
12
Aug 23, 2009 11:44AM

Aug 23, 2009 11:54AM
1
Aug 23, 2009 02:06PM
9
Aug 24, 2009 10:53AM
1
Aug 24, 2009 11:10AM
5
Aug 24, 2009 11:23AM
3
Aug 24, 2009 11:27AM
1
Aug 24, 2009 11:43AM

Aug 24, 2009 11:44AM

Aug 24, 2009 11:52AM

Aug 24, 2009 11:54AM
5
Aug 24, 2009 11:54AM

Aug 24, 2009 11:58AM
2
Aug 24, 2009 12:05PM
2
Aug 24, 2009 12:10PM
2
Aug 24, 2009 12:44PM
4
Aug 24, 2009 12:57PM
2
Aug 24, 2009 01:12PM
6
Aug 24, 2009 02:09PM
3
Aug 24, 2009 02:25PM

Aug 24, 2009 02:26PM
3
Aug 24, 2009 05:41PM
1
Aug 24, 2009 10:00PM
1
Oct 09, 2009 09:02PM
Share
New Message
Please login to post a reply