Probably not a big deal, and here's why:
Juries have a strong preference for senior users, so when you bring an infringement suit, you demand a jury trial.
Juries make gestalt decisions - seriously, can you explain what the difference between "clear and convincing" and "preponderance of the evidence?" Technically, clear and convincing may be higher, but can you think of a situation in a jury room where the jury deliberates and decides - you know what, I really feel like the preponderance of the evidence was on Microsoft's side, but I'm not sure it was clear and convincing.
This might have some small effect on bench trials, because judges tend to like to wax poetic about small legalistic differences, but all that means is that there are likely to be fewer bench trials as junior users try to take this out of the hands of the judge.