contrary to your assertions the CO ruling was not well reasoned at all. It was flawed in logic and in technical terms.

Next - the concept of the "markman" is also coming into question by the courts themselves...

Next - not appealing this narrow ruling means nothing...most infringers don't even fall under it...

Next EDIG actually has real technologythat it is licensing and marketing - look up the definition of a patent troll - it means a company or person that simply sues on patents period...EDIG has technology it is in the process of marketing - thus they are not a patent troll...the amount of the settlement does not make them a patent troll according to that slang definition - having nothing else but patent's your suingon makes a company or person a troll...

That's not EDIG at all as the facts indicate.

Next - winning anything against the giant Apple is a very good sign of the validity of these patents...

Next - Handle is obviously competent and doing its job...IMO of course...