InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 2
Posts 320
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 02/20/2013

Re: xlt leader post# 31007

Saturday, 04/06/2013 2:28:41 PM

Saturday, April 06, 2013 2:28:41 PM

Post# of 68424
I didn't say "If Google IS found to infringe", I said "If Google WAS found to infringe". The WAS meaning that the event has already happened. The purpose of taking down the biggest player in the game first is to obtain leverage against everyone else. If Google could lose in court, then so will you.

I was once almost sued for copyright infringement for some artwork a Web developer put on my company's website. It didn't cost me much to settle with the company when I was notified about the infringement. I guarantee you if I had taken it to court it would of cost me a lot more than what I paid. The point here is that the cost of settlement is always lower before walking into a courtroom. This is why Microsoft would act on settlement now, it's cheaper
Now you might say why would Vringo accept less from Microsoft right now? Have you ever played blackjack? In blackjack when you get a 21 and the dealer shows an ace, before the dealer reveals his cards you can request even money vs the 1.5x you would normally get. That's the smart play in blackjack and getting whatever reasonable amount of money they can get from Microsoft without a trial is the smart business play.