My fellow long friends, do I deserve some rounds of applause for 2 times pretty accurate speculation???
Kool Aid Drinker Thursday, 01/23/14 02:30:24 AM
Re: Kool Aid Drinker post# 46520
Post # of 48777
My believing was right! G's W/A is bogus! I would guess the RR will be 5.5 % to 6 % minimum (willful infringement.) But I won't expect goolge gonna pay us anytime soon. Those bastards will drag this out through appeals. Hopefully we will collect everything the thief has been owing us at once (including laches and jury math error please.)
My believing was right! G's W/A is bogus! I would guess the RR will be 5.5 % to 6 % minimum (willful infringement.) But I won't expect goolge gonna pay us anytime soon. Those bastards will drag this out through appeals. Hopefully we will collect everything the thief has been owing us at once (including laches and jury math error please.)
Kool Aid Drinker Thursday, 12/12/13 11:44:35 AM
Re: None
Please don't attack me, I am just a layman in law. For instance, on March 1, 2014 (couple weeks after Jan 22, 2014 settlement conference, of course w/o settlement.), if... I say IF HJJ hammer on google (5% RR, google wants .5%, lol), google can take the ruling to CAFC from that day on, correct? Is it a another 10 months process? Can they take the case to SCOTUS after CAFC decision? As a code writing person, I do believe the W/A is red herring. Why? You need an engine to run a car (doesn't matter the car is front wheel drive or rear wheel drive.) Lang patent is the engine of the car (concept of click through rate.) The front wheel drive or rear wheel drive is the filtering process. Lang patent is a methodology (get the best results based on click through rate.) It doesn't matter how google changes the filtering steps, they still get the result from click through rate on ads.) Looking at the flow chart of a methodology. Programmers can code differently but the end result is the just the same
