My take on all of that is that it was all intentionally ambiguous. I'm like everyone else here - don't have a clue as to what is truly going on here, but holding on and hoping for the best.

I don't think anything RG has said would preclude what Virt recently posted from being true, or a couple of other scenarios that were disucssed right after the Q came out.

My biggest "concern" at this point would be the answer to exactly how much leverage does all this secrecy give TPL. If you come to the conclusion that it really doesn't give them that much leverage, well, you can come up with other, less desirable, reasons why they want the secrecy.

"Also, how, or why, if TPL is asking for large payments from the T3, do they expect them to agree to those expensive licenses when all public evidence & statements points to what the Js paid was in fact not extrordinary large sums?"

If I knew the answer to that I could be making $500 per hour in the legal profession.

I think it's possible that while the NDA forbids public disclosure on the settlement details, it may be allowable to use that info in private negotiations under certain restrictions.

Actually, to put it bluntly, I think a lot of things are possible, both good and bad. I haven't sold anything for about 8 months when I neede some cash. So I'm betting on the good outcome. In my mind it's a little better than 50/50 at this point.

And what is your opinion?