"Could QCOM be waiting to see what happens with their own platform patents before inking a deal with Edig?"
If you have an understanding of ...e.Digitals claim phrase of 774
"a power source connected to control circuitry for supplying electrical power to device"
device being any periphery elements of a so called platform....
per smans recognized application....
"11. A mobile platform comprising: a camera; a processor connected to the camera; memory connected to the processor; a display connected to the memory; and software held in the memory and run in the processor to cause the processor to display on the display an image captured by the camera of a first object and a second object, detect and track the first object, detect and track the second object, determine a spatial relationship between the first object and the second object, determine an augmentation object to render based on the spatial relationship between the first object and the second object, and display on the display the augmentation object."
For the mobile platform noted above...perhaps it comes down to how they do the connecting and configuring of periphery elements of a hardware platform(mobile platform)....to define the software application end result "augmentation object" without dedicated circuitry issues.
On the fly configuration of periphery elements.
We know how e.Digital does it and why they fought so had to preserve the claims of 774.
doni
