When I first read the piece, I had an "oh s***" moment. Then, in following comments from people much more knowledgeable about coding that I am, I settled back down. They are agreeing with you. HOWEVER, my statement isn't about if it is or isn't a workaround. My statement is about GOOG CLAIMING they have a workaround in place since May 12, 2013. Which, IMO, they will claim, and VRNG will have to prove that it still infringes. And, in my understanding, in a way not immediately intuitive to how you might think, it is not GOOG who has to prove non-infringement, but rather VRNG who has to prove infringement. From what I can read, VRNG will be able to successfully do just that, but it is another risk that will keep pps lower than otherwise until this point also is clarified by the courts.
good luck (to both of us) !
arp
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
