I stand by my original point that MNTA can alter its business model to emphasize trade secrets more and patents less… if that’s what the law of the land requires.
I agree - my disagreement, such as it was, is about the degree to which this will be possible. But I nonetheless agree that at least a little of this is possible.
At the University a Patent gets you Hall of Fame status. In business, often you give away the store. A collegue who had been a chemist at a big chemical plant said he never applied for a patent as this was just inviting other firms to copy your invention. If two judges can alter the law to allow violation of a new patent, nothing is safe.