Surely if they go on record as saying that they don't plan to sue now, that means they don't consider that SSD sales to date have caused them losses, which means that any future lump sum awarded would be lower in light of this?

Surely if SSD makers legitimately licensed SATA (what other "ways storage devices talk to computers" are there?) then they are pretty well covered against this sort of thing? Seagate is behaving exactly like the RIAA in the face of a new, disruptive technology.

Obvious really isn't it.

If he sues a few players in this nascent market then he'll get a small amount in damages (or license fees) and the market will be strangled. No new players will enter, the existing ones may leave or go bust and then Seagate has to develop the market on it's own.

If he waits then the bigger players get involved, the market is developed, volumes go up, it becomes an integral part of laptops and then he sues. At this point the market is worth more so he either gets more in damages or can set a higher price for licensing.

Just business as usual.

So Seagate has admitted that it is aware it's patents are being violated yet is deliberately choosing not to sue?

Why does this not invalidate Seagate's right to the patent, like it would with a trademark?

First they release some Windows only stuff.

Now they try this patent trolling.

They should be careful RE upsetting the sysadmins - otherwise the HDD purchases will all go to someone else.

Look what we did to SCO.

Or have it thrown out of court later?