Key differences there:
Visto has filed a suit, nowhere near the status of NTP v. RIMM. We have not been through the court process, appeals process, etc. The suit was just filed.
Visto has a history of litigation, none of it successful, including the announcement of a lawsuit against Microsoft the day after they signed a license agreement with NTP
We’ve preliminarily reviewed the patents in question, and they appear to describe a system that is unrelated to how GoodLink works. With that in mind, we will encourage Visto to resolve this quickly.
Lastly, and IMO, most importantly, Good has a history of settling litigation as opposed to using resources that could better be used elsewhere.