I don't need to review comments from investors back in 2009 to evaluate the WDDD v. ATVI lawsuit. Parties settle for many reasons. I'm no patent attorney, but I am a seasoned attorney who has been outside counsel trying lawsuits for my clients and in house at some of the largest corporations in the world, where I have learned to better evaluate the risks of litigation. One of the things that I can almost guarantee is that the African American female judge in this case is extremely bright and will force the parties to limit their arguments and evidence to the matters relevant to the claims and defenses. WDDD will file numerous pre-trial motions, including a motion to prohibit ATVI from raising any issues that even hint at the "patent troll" story that you site below. Simply put, these arguments are not relevant to the claims and defenses. Moreover, whatever probative value they may have is clearly outweighed by their prejudicial effect. The judge will grant them with little deliberation. If you have an issue with patent trolls, take it up with your Congressman. This trial will not be the forum for that argument.
In addition, if Goliath tried to convince the jury that David is undeserving of the full amount of damages allowable under the law due to the small size of David's company, I can give you example after example of how David can rebut ATVI's arguments with easily-understandable arguments to inflame the jury to hit ATVI hard. This case is pending in WDDD's backyard. Never underestimate the benefit of a home town jury. This lawsuit is full of land mines for ATVI, and if they get hit hard at Markman, they know they will have an uphill fight.
As for your basher and reasonable expectations comments, I will take a pass at a rebuttal. I'll let the folks on the board make their own assessment. I need to bolt to a meeting.
Good day.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
