Ann: Nearmap made aware of complaint in US District Court (Utah), page-100

I've been reading the 97 page complaint that was filed by Eagleview and it seems lots of the claims are rather miniscule but one interesting excerpt I saw was "There are countless other ways one could try to develop a roof measuring system other than using EagleView’s patented selection of images, but Nearmap has chosen to use EagleView’s patented ways".

Even if that were true which we will find out, it does suggest that damages can't be too high if the same objective could be achieved via another way. Not entirely sure why Eagleview put this here, it weakens the case.