Courts fix errors all the time in the damages phase of a case, time will tell if he does that. Serious question, do you honestly believe the Judge favors one party over the other in this case?
If Cisco and Dell think Google needs an Amicus Curiae filed on their behalf (arranged by the defense) then Google's case including it's appeal is in serious trouble. Giant companies do not seek Amicus Curiae briefs because they already have the resources to defend themselves properly as to relevant information including damages as it pertains to the case.
Some interesting articles in a few different Silicon Valley newspapers about Google's stockpiling of patents. I can't link to them in the board but if you search you can find them easy enough. The bottom-line in these articles is the Motorola purchase was just the beginning of Google doing M&A for the sake of a patents portfolio and strategically Google has changed their position on patents and have joined other large technology companies. I never thought Google EVER had an anti-patent position to begin with but anyway thats what is being reported. Good luck guys.
Judge did not seem to worried when he told Google to settle it or he will.
Your analogy is wrong, most people just pay the parking ticket because it is not much money and a waste of time to fight it.
People that want to fight an expensive speeding ticket are willing to do so because the amount is much more and they want to take their chances in front of a judge .. i.e maybe the police do not show up at court etc. In this case the police did show up and had a lot of evidence and the Judge told them to pay. Regardless even the best case scenario for VRNG is just a footnote in the annual report for Google, they will pay it and move on - but they are still sending the right message - sue us for IP and we will fight you to the very bitter end.
I do agree that Google will fight to the bitter end but they should have settled this years ago - it was a strategic mistake and now it ends up costing more. Here are some reasons to be long without FUD.
1) Google lost the case because of the evidence - they did infringe.
2) The Judge told BOTH parties in open court that neither of them will get what they want if the court has to make a settlement decision. That usually means a compromise - and 3.5% of the 20.9% seems basically like FRAND license terms - keeping in mind how much Google has profited from someone's IP.
3) Googles appeal doesn't look very good when it significantly relies on the USPTO decisions ad the bar is set very high - its not a "do over" etc.
4) On ZTE I think the India news can only be seen as positive and the German court are making their ruling on the 17th. The patents are tight, have you read them?
So is it more risky to be short or long?
Serious question, do you think the India news was bad, is that your argument? Why did you put "great" in quotes, I think facts like the ZTE India injunction are only positive for the company not negative. Can you explain your contrarian position.
If you look at the 2012 annual report (page 43) and do the dollar conversion based on today's exchange rate ZTE India generates $2.7 Billion in revenue for the Parent company each year. I believe 15% is in Smartphones and 15% related to mobile telecom infrastructure. The rest is services, packet network and regular telecom. I am not sure how much of this is infringed but these are huge numbers guys. They just launched 5 new phones covering all the different price points in India so ZTE already made a big bet on India, you can read it in the annual report, we may be looking at upwards of a million a day just in India (I am being hyper conservative with those numbers).
Vringo has 41 million in cash and a burn rate consistent with the level of new litigation but remember this can be controlled \ managed to a certain extent so I am not sure what you are seeing there. For the Google case - they have plenty of resources for any appeals process but nothing so far indicates that Google will win an appeal and be granted a new trial in this case. In fact the opposite is true if you consider laches for Vringo.
Yes that is correct.
The bigger picture is how it impacts the other suits. (I think we have 3-4 others against ZTE but not 100% sure on that). ZTE's revenue goals for India is 1.9 Billion (total not just phones). They have been on the decline in India with $700 Million in 2012 down from 1.5B in 2009 (but the recession and Huawei should be factored in). ZTE India has said they are re-evaluating India's market shifting away from regular telecom equipment to focus more on mobile. They have about 10% of the market but want 30% cent in three years so they unveiled five new smartphones (at all the price points). It takes a major investment to do this - this is a very big deal and hopefully we will se a global license. I think they want 500-700 Million for that (Someone did analysis on it -either here or on ihub). Good luck.