Excellent, that you bring this post to our attention again....at least from my viewpoint.

I imagine most of my posts are skimmed over or not taken seriously, but I have expressed earlier today and in the past, my concern with the term "business resolution" and lack of emotion in pr....not emitting a sense of victory or finality.

I was also of the opinion that everything, meaning everything, would depend on the outcome of the PTO re-exam. This may not be the case, and most said it would never be agreed to.....but I will betcha this is where we are headed. This is good if one believes the patents are secure. We will eventually have our settlement.

I think TPL mislead everyone by suggesting higher royalty rates were being agreed to and infringers were risking supply chain disruptions. Good sales pitch and it worked effectively to sign all these other licensees.The trouble is, it looks like they were all given great deals. Why? I suspect TPL had bills to pay....lawyers, travel expenses, etc. Remember, both plaintiffs and defendants agreed to be responsible for their own attorneys fees and expenses, as evidenced by PTSC's last quarterly report.....meaning nobody has won yet. Poker MVP....I think you had this right from the get go. So we wait.