This is why, short of changing the way patents are issued, damages should be based on a meaningful metric like lost sales, or licensing fees, not theoretical damages based on a hypothetical product that was never, ever going to be made.
My understanding is that they can claim any amount of damages they want, but won't necessarily be awarded the claimed amount; and that their business model is based on people settling rather than on winning in court.
If this change was made, would there be a shortcut whereby the defendants could simply lose and have to pay close-to-zero damages, or would they still have to choose between "defending themselves in court", "settling" and "paying the claimed damages"?
