Right on, cheers! I think the point they were making was that if one of their suppliers gets sued for patent infrigement then they could lose that supplier. VPCO says they have other sources of product but the loss of any one type would effect the consumer who prefers that type.
http://sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/844856/000095012311031364/c14914e10vk.htm
Source and Availability of Raw Materials We believe that an adequate supply of product and raw materials will be available to us as needed and from multiple sources and suppliers.
Trademarks We have been awarded trademarks on certain of our brands, including: Krave®, EZsmoker®, Smoke Star®, Fifty-One® and Green Puffer®. We have and continue to market, develop and invest in each of these brands
Existing or Pending Patents Could Prevent Us From Operating Our Business In Its Present Form. Ruyan, a Chinese company, has made certain public claims as to their ownership of a Chinese patent relating to an “Atomizing Electronic Cigarette.” We currently purchase our products from Chinese manufacturers other than Ruyan. Should Ruyan’s patent be valid and enforceable and cover the devices we purchase from our suppliers, we may be forced to pay more for our products or we may be cutoff from our supply. We may also face a potential action by Ruyan, which we may be forced to defend and which we may ultimately lose. Should any of these events occur, they are likely to have a material adverse effect on our ability to operate our business as a going concern.
So they could be sued... but risk nothing, gain nothing.