Perlman mentions he contacted Mallun Yen of Cisco about papers supporting apportionment of damages. Where is the basis for apportionment of damages. After Yen claimed she lost Perlman's email, Perlman finally got two papers: Royalty Stacking by Lemley/Shapiro published "just in time" for the 2007 patent reform bill. Perlman noted: Reads like science fiction. work-for-hire. (it was funded by Intel, Cisco, et al.) The Thomas paper "apportioning patent damages", taken apart by Rooklidge. Quotes were taken out of context. Perlman concludes: "Two junk papers." There was also the CRS report by John Thomas which speaks kindly of apportionment of damages.
Of a certain professor writing on "first to file":
"This guy is a fucking liar."
Elsewhere: Thomas is accused of mis-citation of Judge Michel.
Simon stated that some of Mark's papers have been funded by Intellectual Ventures. The funding here was for studies on "who" is promoting most patent litigation: trolls (NPEs) or other people. This funding does not detract from the point that Lemley's papers on apportionment of damages have been funded by Intel, Cisco, et al.
Video: Intel, startup face off in patent debate
Panel explores damages, other issues in patent reform bill