It is always good to see the ethical side of an argument win. I was sick and tired of the bashing and trashing that Navico put out. Good for Garmin. They acted like Gentlemen throughout the whole ordeal. Here is the link
http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions-orders/16-1572.Opinion.6-8-2017.1.PDF
Yes, Garmin is pretty happy about that decision:
http://newsroom.garmin.com/press-release/featured-releases/garmin-prevails-navico-patent-dispute
But I'm not sure how you know which company is in the right about this matter. I've been posting Garmin vs Navico updates on this other patent issue entry thread...
https://www.panbo.com/archives/2015/07/srt_acquires_class_b_ais_patent_consequences_uncertain.html
... but I never felt like I could determine the validity of Navico's patent.
The "winner" is still very much up in the air:
https://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/news/2017/09/11/garmin-ordered-to-pay-38-million-in-ongoing-patent.html
There are two separate battles going on here. One is about the validity of Navico's patents, and Garmin seems to have won that one in June.
But the other is about how well Garmin minded the decisions of the International Trade Commission, whose job is to enforce patent protections not decide their validity. The ITC was apparently very unhappy with Garmin's behavior, as evidenced by the huge fine. And the fact that patents were eventually broken apparently does not change that result, hence the new decision of a federal court that Garmin must pay the $38,755,000 in damages to Navico. Garmin does plan to appeal.
Though it would be interesting to know details of the deal, it sure seems like good news that Garmin and Navico have made peace and some sort of cross-licensing agreement:
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/navico-and-garmin-resolve-patent-disputes-300594527.html