I wonder how air-tight you can make that reasoning. I suspect you could structure the settlement as paying to use the underlying technology _including_ the pate

I wonder how air-tight you can make that reasoning. I suspect you could structure the settlement as paying to use the underlying technology _including_ the patents etc., rather than licensing the patent per se (so the fees paid are not directly predicated on the existence of a patent). Be interesting to see how the courts would react to that though, and if they see it as a sign you are negotiating in bad faith.