What a terrible article! To begin with, even if Judge Jackson allowed the "prior art" patents to be admitted, my quick take on those is that they are immaterial to Vringo's case. They don't appear to represent the same system. And if Ken's patented work was built with the PA concepts then I guess there must be PA even before those, like language. And before that an alphabet, and before that...
Anyway, it's not clear to me that this supposed PA is even admissible at this time, after the Markman hearing. The author of the SA article speaks of Google planning it this way. Well, if so, good luck, because it seems protocol in these patent cases speaks against this as being a viable play. I guess we'll see.
And lastly, the language the writer uses to advise that we all sell now is way, way too strong to be taken seriously. He must be in someone's pocket. The only other alternative is he is a just a dolt. What would be most likely? ("Occam's Razor")
I'm only holding 1453 shares but I also hold goog and I am telling you that people are continually counting them out or down for the count every time something happens between it and a competitor. What they forget is that they are brilliant at innovating their brand and positioning for the future. They did not get to where they are by standing idly by waiting for someone to come along and pick them off piece by piece. Underestimating them is a serious miscalculation. That said, I am still holding with my stop loss in place.
The funniest thing about his article is that the Enhydris Private Equity Blog article that he quotes in his article and seems to be the basis of his article was written by someone LONG VRNG! If you actually READ the Enhydris article, the author states that he believes Google will not win the summary judgement dismissal they seek.