You still hate this stock rite? :D
No. rite/right or wrong. But I fail to see why anyone would think their case is so strong.
In my previous posts, I outlined why I think the Burst case is weak. One important point is that they never went after similar technology used in skip-proof CD players. IIRC, those technologies pre-dated the Burst patents.
But, as I said before, patents are tricky things. Who knows what the judge might rule? I just fail to see why anyone would consider it a better than 100:1 odds. The market does not seem too excited about it. But. sometimes, that is where the money is made. Like in AAPL from 1997 on.
-KCMW