They did not patent all displays. They own very specific designs spelled out in the claims. Critically, if those are currently the best types of display designs that create products of acceptable commercial quality, that's a pretty strong argument they'll use in support of the legitimacy of their patents and that they are valid and enforceable.
I think you may want to look over the QMC patent portfolio before you make a blanket statement. You also have to consider there are many types of QD. It would be like I have a patent for paint so nobody else can make paint.
w/everything Nanosys thought about and all that help from MIT and CAL what makes you think they don't have a pat covering that too? ...maybe they're just waiting for $$$ incentive to file suit. Quick, head for the Hills, (just kidding)
I would like to know "all the other far-fetched academic ideas that are posted on here." that you are referencing. Would that be any opinion that differs from your own, those you consider too positive, or do you have specifics in mind?
Clarification would help and give others a chance to respond.
Personally, I see it as a win for QMC regardless of the outcome between Nanosys/QDV
....When the need is great enough; they will come. The difference between a lab cubicle vs thousands of sq ft for mass production is telling...as price/kilogram comes down, (even more so)