from mikehd25

First of all I am an american and have complete faith in our legal system but I believe the jury had a misunderstanding about the past damages. Read over their questions the last two days and compare the following math. see what you think

Before the jury starting deliberating the were informed that all damages are to be calculated from 9/15/11 for google as well as co defendants. The only piece of evidence they had to use for codefendents in consideration of damages is a slide that vrng provided with each co-defendant listed seperatly with the following damages. Keep in mind these damages represent 3.5% of 20% of total revenue from smart ads

google-$451,190,903
aol-$22,693,517
IAC-$18,917,570
target-$282,380
Gannet-$12348

Now keep in mind the judge after reading the verdict page by page very careful asked for it back after it was read aloud by the court clerk to double check something that he obviously didn’t see the first time.

now look at the following calculations.

aol $22,693,517 x 35%= $7,942,730 damage amount $7.9mil
Iac $18,917,570 x 35%= $6,621,149 damage amount $6.6mil
target $282,380 x 35%= $98833 damage amount $98833
ganet $12348 x 35%=$4321 damage amount $3432

GOOG $451,190,903 x3.5%= $15,791,681 damage amount $15.8 million.

The jury applied the running royalty rate to the past damage amount that VRNG was seeking. THEY DID BAD MATH and misunderstood the answers the court gave to questons. I don’t blame them. They wanted to go home and felt they were doing what the judge instructed.

One question the jury asked was “if a running royalty rate is to be used are we to apply to each defendant” They were asking if they needed to apply the 3.5% to damages for each defendent.

The question today was “If we assign a lump sum amount to be awarded is this in addition to the running royalty amount”
They were asking if they award a lump some do they need to apply the running royalty % to this lump sum

The judge double checked the verdict in my opinion because he thought it said 158,000,000 for google and when read by clerk he realized it was incorrect. If he noticed this right away it would explain why after the 5 min recess he recessed for the day. This is all speculation but makes way to much sense. If the judge is in charge of the exact damages and has the power to change them I would look for this to happen if he figures this out. Just my opinion. This post should get some donations. I don’t think anyone has come up with this scenario.

Read more:http://vringo.freeforums.net/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=360#ixzz2BVEDeFpW

Posted in Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*