I'm not saying that through a court order TPL would be forced to sign manufacturers.  What I'm saying is this case opens a new door in how licensing programs would be carried out.  We are currently going after end users.  We've knew that was the strategy for quite some time.  If the SC decided that the "first sale doctrine" was being violated I would tend to think for companies like TPL it could change their strategy.  You would think many end users would turn to their suppliers and ask for help or relief against pending litigation.  They would probably demand their supplier obtain an MMP license.  It would, in my mind, demonstrate the need for us to hit a home run with the J's.  It's been my experiance that customers don't take kindly to problems brought upon them by their suppliers.   I'm merely pointing out that it could lead to some strategy changes by TPL and perhaps give potential defendants something else to scream about in court.  We need a strong resolution in Marshall, 30 minutes from my house by the way, just in case the pool of candidates shrinks.  Of course may be I'm misunderstanding what the case before the SC is all about?  Corrections welcomed....