Again, it appears you miss the point of Deb's quoted material, and the counter-argument re: Quanta v. LG that I've offerred consistently in Agora posts and in pms to you:
"The Court's ruling underscores the continued viability of the longstanding doctrine of patent exhaustion (also known as the "first sale doctrine"), as well as the importance of using only carefully drafted contracts in connection with the transfer and use of patented products."
My understanding (open to correction) is that this "longstanding doctrine of patent exhaustion" has been in place for over 100 years. No crystal ball required, the court merely upheld its long-standing position.
As I suggested previously, I strongly suspect that the implementation of "...carefully drafted contracts in connection with the transfer and use of patented products" probably occurred within weeks if not days after the original establishment of the doctrine by the SC - a hundred years ago. It was no less an "issue" then as it is today. And certainly contract language has been further refined over all these years to assure that, when desired, the exhaustion issue is overcome.
FWIW and JMHO,
SGE
