My thought, too. I don't know about the patent stuff, but I believe they sued over Costco's Kirkland guarantee. I never thought that lawsuit had any footing because how is it decided who has the best ball and whether or not Kirkland's balls are just as good? It's subjective.
I think it's absolutely clear how it's decided, and that's why I thought the lawsuit had no merit. It's up the the individual consumer. If I think they are "as good as the leading name brand"" (or however exactly it's worded), I will keep the ball. If you don't believe they are as good you can return them no questions asked. As long as Costco honored the return (which they do to a fault) I didn't see where the "leading manufacturers" can complain. Or at least win a lawsuit.
I do agree about the lawsuit it's self, though. My understanding is that they were complaining about the claims of the guarantee. I don't think it was ever a copyright issue.