I like to think of it as a court decision to determine the meaning/definition of the keywords in the dispute. As an example, and has been stated before, what does MEMORY mean? RAM ROM FLASH etc. The defendants are trying to change the definition to get them out of their liability and infringement issues. If the court follows edig's definition in the Markman then there may be more likelihood that any potential trial will go their way as the words have been defined in a manner that is more likely to enforce the patent and ding the infringers.

Ding away I say.