I think it's safe to say that the companies (in aggregate) that EDIG will be going after if we had an outright positive ruling probably hold 75% (or more) of the world's wealth or cash. Purely speculative, I'm sure.... but nevertheless, it is a significant percentage.

If the Markman (non-ruling, as it is) was clearly FOR plaintiff EDIG, EDIG would have the keys to the kingdom... or at least a percent of it somewhat larger than "nil to negligible".

An outright finding would have an effect on many domestic AND foreign companies doing business in the U.S. (Immediate INJUNCTIONS on cell phones, FLASH recorders, etc...) I'm not versed enough in Patent law (or any law... so take my posts for what they're worth... about 1/2 of a share of EDIG at today's close) to make a statement of how international patentability / infringement of FLASH would be affected, if at all. (Isn't there some UN patent agreement?)

IMO, EDIG went from being a unknown PITA to now a point where the companies that are using the FLASH technology realize that the court just gave them 30 days notice before TSHTF when DM comes out with guns ablazing on how (as our great tech gurus here have pointed out) the court interpreted this patent as an analog patent, and not a DIGITAL patent. And don't think that those other companies legal teams aren't following PACER regarding this case and have read the same information on the "analog" patent, as it is on PACER.

Was this ruling designed this way? More importantly, was publishing it on PACER as such the way to communicate to all the other legal teams (and industry press)? I'm not going to say that on a public forum. Could just be that the court (clerks) don't understand the technology at all... but the interpretations of the ruling that was posted by many here don't fully suggest that it was a simple "misconstruing" of the language of the patent.

But, HE WHO HAS THE GOLD MAKES THE RULES.

This case has world-wide repercussions and they know it. The court's opinion seems to indicate that EDIG should just go away.... settle for peanuts rather than push the issue with truth and facts.

Here's a simple way to break it down.

Did the world have FLASH technology as EDIG has it described in the patent before the patent was granted?

The USPTO didn't think so either.