la-idcc-fan, just because a jury does not find a patent is infringed does not mean there was lack of justification to take legal action. The following is from your post.
"I cannot think of an instance (except maybe the recent setback on the 151 patent) where we go into litigation with no reasonable justification. In fact I can see the new law benefitting us in cases involving reverse patent hold-up."
Ia-idcc-fan: Your analysis concluded that IDCC would probably not be seriously affected by the terms of the proposed Innovation Act. That might be true for a company like IDCC with a lot of cash and the patent know how to process and litigate patents. If you do a little more research you will find that the opposition is primarily concerned with the effect the bill would have on individual inventors, small business, and universities, and the resultant effect on the economy. The following is a good summary, including site access, of various opposition positions.
Although, it appears that IDCC might not be affected, there is the law of unintended consequences. Once lawyers and courts get involved in interpreting the specific wording of the law, the original intent often seems to get distorted.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
