RE: RE: RE: RE: Is this a stupid question? Obviously we would not be on the eve of a trial after several years of litigation and failed summary judgement applications if LOGM had a viable defence based on its own protected technology.
Can anyone point to LOGM having pleaded this at any time during the case? If not I believe we can safely assume that it is a non-runner.
Perhaps some posters are going out of their way to scare investors.....