My legal opinion is still my opinion, no matter how correct it might be, based on my background and knowledge. But the fact is, I am not the one to decide the issue.
But I think I can give very good guidance as to what I believe the course of the legal proceedings will take.
If you will note, my opinions are objective. I am a big fan of Intel but I do not let that color my opinion. I am an investor first, and a fan, second.
I do not, like some Pom Pom posters take a meaningless "legal" opinion and post incessantly. Being wrong is not aided by repetition amongst those who know better.
And, if memory serves, in 8 or ten years of doing this, here and on other threads, Intel, Microsoft, and other legal issues, I have not been wrong YET in matters, legal. Both in analysis and predicting of the outcome.
And, so as Baretta would say, you can take that to the bank.
I think that my background, some in business aspects, does not give me an edge in the technical issues. But I do think that people's past achievements do color their present views. For, instance I know a lot of people who own white box or work at shite box (screwdriver shops) who's background must also be taken into consideration, whether they are expressing their "logic" or technical opinion.
And a special thanks for Ali finding those excellent posts of mine from the past.
IF you mean something much more simple:
When I say, "court" I mean the whole process. When I say, "inside of a courtroom" I mean a full trial. I do not think the case will be tried, I think that there is no smoking gun, or we certainly would have heard by the leaky AMD.
And I have advised Intel not to settle. Not for a penny, to eliminate the bribery hope of AMD, or the hope they may recoup expenses, or the hope they may get some Pyhrric (like that word?) victory.
those two thoughts are not mutually exclusive.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
