RE:WI-LAN response to the biggest thief
Big thanks to Egyptian for posting this, and Ronran for later news last night re mistrial denial. Excellent intelligence. As a non-lawyer but policy analysis wonk, I have two general comments: (1) WiLan's argument about the evidentiary issue seems extremely rigorous, and Gilstrap's handling of the issue showed a first class mind at work, in my opinion. But what is a jury to make of these highly technical and complex lines of argument, especially their implications for a verdict? I think this is where real uncertainty remains, and will until a settlement or a verdict. (2) In any argument or negotiation, part of the strategy is to leave no stone unturned, always testing the opponent's response (and, in a courtroom context, possibly generating information that can be used on appeal). So I wouldn't assume the motion for a mistrial was anything more than a tactical gambit along the way. Not necessarily a sign of desperation, etc., maybe just a reminder that Apple has good lawyers too.
Good to see Win putting up a good fight. That's really all we can ask.
Gormless