No offense aassnnaapp, but I think it is worth the time to discuss this amongst ourselves so we don't panic at the meeting. It does not hurt to be somewhat educated even if it is only guesswork.
For example, if management tells us that they have decided to resume the T-Mobile case with a contingency attorney everyone should not panic - it could be a very good thing.
If management tells us they have a settlement than we should be realistic about how much that settlement should be. I still don't know how to value this patent but I certainly believe special damages in the amount a $100M is certainly not ridiculously high (actually, I would say a few million low).
In any case, management should be able to explain how they valued the settlement, what they assumed the risk was of trial and the math as to why they decided to settle. The systems I described will be how T-Mobile will decide how much they are willing to pay.
I don't expect a settlement. Nothing is stopping us from pursuing licensing deals elsewhere or even going after other US infringers. Being tough with T-Mobile will demonstrate that we are not a pushover willing to take pennies on the dollar.
I guess I am expecting this thing to go back to the courtroom, especially after the developments of the state case. It might be better if everyone had an understanding of what they can expect (or what they feel is deserved) BEFORE walking into the meeting and not attack management for what is a reasonable business decision.
JMHO.
AI
