Re: Cost-Benefit Analysis Is Specious Reasoning When Applied To VHC
We can all agree that businessmen, by definition, act in what they perceive as their own best interests.
Ming's thesis is that it's in the best interest of the most farsighted of such businessmen to get a death grip on VHC's patents by whatever means possible. To that end please read the eight page whitepaper generated when Apple tried it's abortive workaround contained in the url in post 76694 by jstevenbaker.
The premise that all such businessmen will follow Apple's shortsighted approach in attempting to bleed VHC of funds such that it collapses in failure is spurious. Ming would not be surprised if certain bankers are even now standing at the ready with interim financing should the need arise.
Since Ming expects VHC's coffers to be replenished by year end from those businessmen of greater vision than those who reside in Cupertino, that possibility for borrowing is more academic than real albeit readily available.
Any further litigation will in no manner shape or form impede VHC's ability to roll out its initiatives. Any such continuing litigation is something that should be cause for Apple to fret over, not VHC.