Guys,
the thread has derailed into a wall-to-wall nonsense.
If I wanted to be polemic, I should advise, those who think the patent is meaningless, to offer themselves to Nikon as consultants in the ongoing legal battle 😇
Actually, if the patent has withstood for years several lawsuits filed (not by my mother) but by the likes of Apple & co., it means that it is evidently well written. Mind you, I am not agreeing with Red. This is a classic case where the current patent system demonstrates all its limitations and actually prevents technological progress to the detriment of users.
At present, the only real question that makes sense to ask is:
Is it possible that a company like Nikon went off the rails in this matter without taking into account the history of previous lawsuits (perhaps misguided? She tried?) or is Nikon in posses of information that we do not have?