> First to file would not allow Ocado to have patented the concept of the robot sitting above a cell/tote
Ocado patented the concept of a robot sitting above a single cell/tote, not the concept of the robot sitting above a cell/tote.
AutoStore's initial system was the first to have the robot sitting above a stack of totes, however the robot sat above two cells in it's original design (a 'cantilever design'). The settlement actually means that AutoStore cannot develop a robot sitting above a single cell/tote (note that their blackline robots sit across a 'tote and a bit' because of this - see image https://www.prnewswire.co.uk/news-releases/autostore-sues-oc...).
There is lots of historical complexity as with all patent cases, but the AutoStore loss in court doesn't mean that Ocado didn't copy them - it just means that Ocado have been judged to be legally allowed to copy them IMO :)
> Ocado would be the poster child [for being] an unscrupulous licensor "stealing" an invention from the actual inventor.
They absolutely are the poster child for this in the material handling world! This is widely known in the logistics industry.