A suit in Texas (or perhaps Germany) makes the claimed IP less valid? Please explain.
Home-grown vs. purchased IP makes one more valid than the other? Please explain
Apple is only suing over IP they developed themselves in-house? Check again.
That's all three addressed. Now you can try again.
In your opinion, would it be a fair penalty for Apple to have major products lines banned from sale in the US over a relatively minor piece of IP they were proven to infringe in a "large, complex product"? If not, why not.
-The U.S. Eastern District of Texas is the most popular troll stomping ground in United States. This is fairly common knowledge, and if you can't pick up on why it's significant, I can't help you.
-IP developed in-house - as it is used by Apple - serves to protect the ideas that go into making their stuff. Purchasing IP is a practice popularized by patent trolls like Intellectual Ventures. Again, if you cannot distinguish between the value of protections afforded to those that create things versus the practices of entities that purchase things for the sole purpose of exploiting it against others for financial gain, I can't help you.
-I don't know what patent of the 4 you're referring to, but they were all filed by Apple.