@mavics assessment may have been accurate, but the courts disagreed, hence the verdict against DJI. And unfortunately, yours or mine opinion on the matter is irrelevant because the courts decision on the next step is what's important.
Buts here's where I'm stumped. I stated 2 facts, and then asked a question. Exactly how did that evolve into this? Now I get it, where people want me to see the bright side of it. Unfortunately, I can't see the light if I don't know what the darkness is. I am not one who only sees the glass as half full, I see it half empty as well. I acknowledge it all, right it wrong, good or bad. Anything less is just lying to myself, and only getting half the picture.
So maybe this issue with DJI will pass. That doesn't mean it didn't exist. I wasn't into drones years ago, so I can't comment on it. I can listen to others opinion on it that was, but since I have no first hand knowledge of it, that's all it is, your opinion.
The courts did not disagree, because the claim hasn't been heard in the courts. All there is so far is a recommendation from the ITC. If you don't understand how any of this works then perhaps you should stop trying to confuse the issue.