Sorry for what?
I'm not sure how many times this has been discussed here. If there are problems with understanding what is written I cannot help with that problem.
I have said all along that the $125 million could be correct, but only for a settlement - whether the settlement is a global settlement across all cable companies or not is another story. I will try one more time to explain this:
Global settlement:
- $125 million settlement awarded to Chanbond by ALL (13) cable companies named in the suit.
- This $125 million settlement would be mostly be covered by Cisco/Arris due to their indemnifying their customers which offers protections to their customers in their supply agreements.
- Very likely a separate deal in place contingent upon settlement of the suit - transferring ownership of the patents to another entity (likely one of the suppliers Cisco/Arris). This definitely occurred, at least in terms of the transfer of ownership of the patents, as Chanbond no longer owns the patents.
Cox Settlement:
- $125 million settlement awarded to Chanbond by Cox Communications.
- Again, this $125 million settlement would be funded by suppliers who indemnified Cox in their supply agreements.
- Again, very likely a separate deal in place contingent upon settlement of the suit.
Is this not easy enough to understand that $125 million is very likely not all that is on the table? This can be easily considered by the value placed on the patents in terms of a per unit basis. The damages were in the multiple billions as zomby agreed all along from considerable available information which was shared endlessly on this board. How could all of this be true, yet Chanbond lawyers and their decision makers waited until the 2nd day of trial after the defendant asked to settle as their case was obsolete? And taking into consideration the value placed on these patents by approved valuation expert testimony. This is very simple stuff that some choose to ignore.
In conclusion, it is highly unlikely that $125 million is all that Chanbond received for the patents. On the contrary, it's very likely that there was a separate deal in place contingent upon the settlement, which transferred ownership of the patents to another entity (likely one of the suppliers of the units), who realized they were on the hook for a ridiculous amount of cash especially given Comcast's willful infringement. They made an intelligent decision in buying the tech so they could both A. Charge licensing fees to all other suppliers/users of the tech, and B. Relieve themselves of current and future liability from Chanbond and proceed with business as usual with no conflicts.
There are many details that are pertinent, one of the most important in my opinion is that the Court could have ordered (per law) for all users of the tech to temporarily cease operations with the tech until the settlement was finalized - this of course would be a devastating decision to all parties including everyday citizens who use the internet. Therefore they had a lot of pressure to settle this thing once and for all. Buying the tech they sell everyday made the most sense and they likely got a discount, given the fact that we can all see Chanbond lawyers and their decision makers are trying to get away with the $125 million being all that is on the table for shareholders to take part in. Think about it - $1 billion split amongst a couple parties, is a lot better than $2 billion split amongst all of us. And they thought they would get away with it, and yet they may - however I'm glad we have some who are fighting that circumstance, and very upset some support that circumstance.
