XpresSpa Group Inc (XSPA)

[Red Angus]

Re work-around:

As I understand it, even if there were a work-around---which many people feel doesn’t exist---the work-around actually has to be IMPLEMENTED in order for the infringement to be cancelled. The work-around can’t merely be something shown to apply in the abstract or in a test of some kind. So, the future actual implementation of a work-around may well be the biggest barrier for Google in our situation, even if able to be accomplished in theory.

Of course what’s pretty suspicious about Google’s newly-claimed work-around, though, (in addition to the points people have already made on this board) is that the work-around is now brought up at the very time when the judge might be making a decision regarding royalty rates. The cases indicate that the existence of a work-around decreases the future royalty rates an infringer has to pay, substantially, if not entirely. So Google, which seems to say whatever needs to be said in order to achieve its business purposes, suddenly claims, voila! it has a work-around.

Gee, do you think that this may be just another example of what Judge Scola and others claim is Big Bad Google’s abuse of the legal system by doing and saying whatever it feels is necessary to delay and disrupt the legal process?

Not only is Google's claimed (non-implemented) work-around inappropriate for the issue presently facing JJ, but it really does seem to be a crass, clumsy, arrogant attempt to influence an upcoming critical royalty rate decision by JJ. I don’t think JJ will fall for it, but I won’t predict anything when it comes to a JJ decision.