At the beginning of the case, DSS asserted numerous claims (in addition to breach of contract) by which they could claim punitive damages. Thus, DSS' CEO at the time likely opined that the punitive damages (for Coupons wilful theft of their IP) could net them $250 million. However, the judge previously dismissed all of the other claims as duplicative of the breach of contract claim. Accordingly, under NY law, DSS was only entitled to obtain its "Lost profits" for Coupons' breach of contract. For the first time, we have learned that DSS' expert calculated these lost profits at $6.7 million (postyle -- you were 100% right). In granting summary judgment for coupons, the judge held that even if they breached the non-disclosure agreement, DSS is not entitled to any damages because such damages are too speculative (essentially, it appears that DSS has never successfully licensed this technology and thus there was no benchmark by which to measure what Coupons would have paid to obtain it). I don't agree with the decision -- essentially Coupons gets away with the breach because of a damages issue -- but it is what it is.
The reason why I always viewed Coupons as an important case was not the size of the potential settlement/judgment, but because it provided the potential for the immediate in-flow of a pot of money by which they could use to continue to fund their larger patent cases. Unfortunately, as an investor, the $$$ issue is now what i am most concerned about.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
