Zero tolerance is okay by me. New info from the company is pretty sparse right now and if there’s nothing to discuss, I can live with low or no posting activity. I have plenty of other things to do anyway and if there’s nothing EDIG-related to talk about, then we shouldn’t feel the need to talk about nothing.

Regarding a petition, I think we should remain in ‘wait and see’ mode at this point. While they have a decent amount of operating cash today, it’s still not enough to start getting ‘lose’ with. Not that marketing themselves is a bad idea (or necessarily very expensive), but it would be a better I think to wait until they passed a few more milestones and could state a more concrete direction for the future. I think we should wait on the digEcor outcome and more filings, then see what develops shortly after that. As RP recently suggested, it may already be something they are considering.

This year’s SHM will likely be held later in the Fall - possibly in November as was the case in 1999 and 2000 when I last attended. They probably want to wait at least until the digEcor trial has concluded before they announce it.

I believe it’s safe to conclude that Samsung is clearly ‘not like the others’ in that DM won’t be settling for nuisance value this time around. In our case that should mean no less than $2M and we can be sure that if we do win Markman, they will end up paying even more. I’d be curious to hear what others think is a REALISTIC settlement amount PRIOR to Markman in February 2010. That is, what would be an amount worth settling for given that we would be giving up the opportunity for true validation of the patents via a potentially favorable Markman decision? Personally I think at least $20M and maybe more considering they’d effectively have to start over with new infringers and accept later court dates. I can’t help but think that they view the Samsung case as the foundation for all future efforts.

- Sinkman