''I agree' we need the 'all' functions included."

emit, it's not that they need "all" included....they are. What's needed is that they each pay more in settlement negations...774 puts strength in that with a positive appeal.

Also, keep in mind, as I see things and a PR says different, they are now going after device specific issues and not company licensing considerations.

The revenues will be based on the devices named, meaning that revenues start out much shorter than prior case objectives...add to that, settling from a position of weakness...and the devices are not paying much.

Negotiating with 774 in the back ground having a positive appeal and the strength of negation gets stronger for all patents, because, the treat of trial and claims construction issues will tend to lean in e.Digitals favor.

As things stand now, the treat of trial and claims construction issues tend to lean in defendants favor.

fwiw

doni