IANAL, but I'm pretty sure that arguing that a patent is invalid in court is a defence against patent infringement. See here for an example where Red Hat showed prior art during trial and got a patent troll's patents invalidated. Similarly in this case, even if B&N fail to show patent misuse, they have a ton of prior art, and arguments that the patents are trivial and don't actually properly disclose the "invention". See here.
Slashdot Mirror
IANAL, but I'm pretty sure that arguing that a patent is invalid in court is a defence against patent infringement. See here for an example where Red Hat showed prior art during trial and got a patent troll's patents invalidated. Similarly in this case, even if B&N fail to show patent misuse, they have a ton of prior art, and arguments that the patents are trivial and don't actually properly disclose the "invention". See here.