Don't get me wrong, I'm with you on taking this to a litigated decision, pro or con, unless of course we're talking about a settlement that is in order of magnitudes larger than recent licensing.
Furthermore, I'd one up you in saying that a settlement, (unless warranted by actual infringement that warrants it) would need to EXCEEED the 2006 license levels. I'm assuming an ACER's infringement would be comparable to and HP's or a Fujitsu's infringement, so at this point, for us to agree to settle with them to settle for less than $50M, considering Fujitsu licensed for $31.6M, would be mostly UNsatisfying.
My comment was simply a question about the motion DENYING the sealing of the documents. Since it appears both sides, Acer and TPL, wanted these documents sealed, and since both sides have been denied, if that was indeed an necessary and serious request, perhaps it is serious enough to result in a settlement that would prevent the docs from having to see the light of day.
Obviously, I'd only be in favor of such a deal if it were significant and remarkable. I suspect TPL and PTSC would be less dogmatic than me, seeing rather another opportunity to claim a victory, and secure additional salary money, debt payoff money, and legal fee funding. With that in mind, if they DID settle, I'm pretty sure I'd be dissappointed in the settlement. However, again, if the filing to seal was TRULY a SERIOUS one, then perhaps it might create an environemnt conducive to accelerating resolution to at least the Acer piece of the case.
