"is this thinking flawed?" re: other infringers supportive influence on the Js.

IMO, yes.  You are only looking at one side and, beyond that, placing way too much credence in the influence other infringers, competitors with the Js, have on the actions of the Js.

The other side that you are ignoring is that there are 28 significant companies out there who have secured a license.  They assumed some risk, bit the bullet, and paid up.  Why, ultimately, did they do that?  Ans: For competitive advantage against their competition.  They obviously thought they were getting a bargain over what their competitors will likely pay.

Now carry that thought to other, unlicensed infringers not currently engaged in the litigation.  From their view, they probably want the Js to pay the maximum, recognizing that merely due to the drawn-out litigation, the Js will likely will be paying more than they will have to pay sans litigation.  Again, if others will pay less, they receive a competitive advantage.

However, your thoughts would be correct IF they thought that the Js actually had a strong case.  But then there's this Stay, and probable settlement negotiations.  Any settlement is not helpful to other infringers thinking they may be able to escape paying anything at all.

This does again bring up something that does surprise me.  I does appear that the Js are still acting in concert, while, at this point in the game, I would have expected an "every man for himself" attitude to prevail.  It will, IMO.  The Js are ultimately competitors.

JMHOs,

SGE