"Who won? I suggest it would be the litigant who met their basic objective. And, if you think about, the primary thing was to keep the patents alive."

I am probably going to regret getting into this one as I have enjoyed being away for the past few weeks, but sorry, I just can't resist. LOL

Sorry, but the PRIMARY thing is to not keep the patents alive, the primary thing is to monetize these patents for $$ amounts that either (a) are large enough to sustain a thriving business, (b) fund other business ventures, (c) both, all of which with one primary objective, to increase shareholder wealth. Now, just think about your statement above regarding your stated primary objective. WE file a lawsuit against the J's, and our primary intention is to keep the patents alive? OK, SGE, no offense, but that is funny. Why would we file a lawsuit with the intention of keeping the patents alive, when we are successfully signing licensees out of court? Why put forth the effort? Why intentionally create the risk? If Lambert's #'s are correct, and that is all we get.....forever.... we definitely didn't win anything. We went to Texas to win and to win big....and we did a little bit better than break even. Did we lose? Depends, we will know after a couple Q's and we see if the license amounts go UP, or go DOWN. Just my 2 cents. Back to luring mode.

Good luck to you, me, us, and all longs.