A previous blog, “It Isn’t Kosher,” dealt with the more humorous – or possibly pathetic –
aspects of Rembrandt Data Technologies LP v. AOL LLC et al. The case does have another, more serious, point to make.
The accused products were modems which were capable of operating in an infringing manner, except that middleware prevented them from so operating during normal operation. The Court held that “the fact that an accused device is capable of being modified to operate in an infringing manner is not sufficient, by itself, to support a finding of infringement.”
Query: What were the folks at Rembrandt thinking when they brought this suit against AOL?
It's not uncommon for plaintiffs to file claims driven by emotion. My own question is: what was Rembrandt's legal team thinking in letting this go all the way to trial?