Replies to post #44106 on Worlds Inc (WDDD)

[cadillacdave]

It may have been costly, but it seemed like the more likely path to victory.

I realize that you are very knowledgeable and have information that I am not privy to. However, the path to victory may have been through TX, not MA.

So in essence, all of the delays (and not blaming you for this) are costly and WDDD loses the war of attrition as it slowly bleeds out from lack of resources.

I understand you make tough choices and there are limits on resources. I still would have taken the shot going through TX. Just my humble opinion.

[cadillacdave]

No doubt it is a tough and lengthy process. But that raises the question, why file against MSFT at all if you weren't willing to see it through? That may have been your winning play.

I realize the IPR process was relatively new at the onset of this case, but at the time the MSFT case was filed you surely had to anticipate their strategy to delay and file for an IPR. In order to defend a patent lawsuit the entire game plan is to delay, delay and delay to bleed the smaller company out. Over time, laws change (as they did here) and the wind blows in a different direction. Timing and momentum has a lot to do with these type of cases. If this case moved through the Courts BEFORE Alice 101, became law, you had a winner on your hands.

Unfortunately, Alice 101 and IPR reviews worked their way into the patent landscape, in my opinion, to specifically diminish and erode intellectual property rights and patents. No doubt, technology is the future and big companies like Facebook, Google and Apple don't want to be bogged down in the Courts paying for patents. Their power and influence buys a lot of political power and the field gets tilted in their favor.

Perhaps you were counting on a win in MA and were blindsided by the 101 decision, as were many? Maybe you wanted to get an early start on the process in TX since we all know it is a slow and timely process?

So I guess now the new path is to abandon the patent enforcement route and head in a new direction?

[cadillacdave]

You say the IPR should cost $1 million. You should know better than me. However my estimate for cost would be half that. Where is S&G in all of this? Have they bailed?

Might want to give the loyal shareholders, who aren't your insider buddies, an update.

Also, an IPR was already done on the ATVI case. Not exactly re-inventing the wheel here. That same firm should be able to do it for $500K or maybe less.

It raises the legitimate question why doesn't S&G do it? If they had such faith and confidence in the patents why let the case in TX fold due to $500K in legal fees? It shows their lack of faith in the process and patents at this point and are cutting their losses.

Remember the old adage "leave them wanting more"? That's how grifters operate. Never be too specific, keep it vague, very few details etc. That keeps the weak minded interested and coming back for more. Kind of like "plan B", "recent asset purchase", "stay tuned" etc.

You are doing great. You already piqued the oldowls interest.