The last PR is interesting because of a couple statements which could be misleading, or perhaps not. We just never know until it is obvious.

First,the statement : "After several years of exhaustive study and nego-tiation"........ leads one to believe that the settlement should be substantial because of time and effort and cost.

Second, they use the term Royalties in this PR.: " are subject to progressively higher royalty rates."

I wish they wouldn't use that term unless they are in fact going  to collect royalties. It leaves one with the cononation that on going fees will be collected when in fact they may not.The definition of royalties is as follows:

a compensation or portion of the proceeds paid to the owner of a right, as a patent or oil or mineral right, for the use of it.

So, as you can see, it may be a one time compensation. I just wish they would not bait one in their statements like that.I guess because they are lawyers writing these things they can be technically correct but at the same time misleading. ( no offense Ron)

GLTAL

Copy of paragraph I took excerpts from:

"After several years of exhaustive study and negotiation, we are pleased with NEC's decision to purchase an MMP Portfolio license," said Mac Leckrone, Alliacense president. "NEC becomes our inaugural MMP Portfolio licensee in 2007, as well as the first to capture a berth in the networking and communications industry segment." He noted that the MMP Portfolio licensees in this segment, as well as future licensees in segments where early tiers have been captured, are subject to progressively higher royalty rates. "We are especially pleased that NEC has chosen to become TPL's program partner instead of continuing as a defendant with Matsushita and Toshiba, against whom TPL filed broad-based infringement claims about 15 months ago in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas."