JimHarrington wrote:
I am saying that settling the case as we did gave us the opportunity to have a business relationship with them going forward, which was more valuable than a court victory that would likely result in us having no business relationship with them ever. It's not a question of retribution.
So.... you settled with them, but didn't have to pay anything because you wanted a "business relationship with them going forward" so badly?
JimHarrington wrote:
We had absolutely no way to pay them what they were demanding even if we'd wanted to. (They were looking for more money than the combined all-time historical revenue of all karaoke producers worldwide.)
But your help license idea was so fantastic, they decided to forego any chance at historically-huge demand for money after 2 years of court for a small percentage of your litigation juggernaut?
THIS IS SCHRÖDINGER'S SETTLEMENT: At any time it's a gigantically-huge demand for all the money in the world from a 2-year battle in the humid jungles of the courtrooms filled with dangerous lies and mistruths
and also at any time is an abandonment of all that fighting for the opportunity to get a tiny percentage of the novel and shrewd business acumen of the "litigation machine" known as PEP.
(Said no one ever)