You say:

"Applying pressure for huge settlements is pointless. Both sides have to feel like they were treated fairly and honestly, otherwise, you are a "Troll" just like so many outsiders imply. I think TPL is working hard to avoid that label. It's pretty clear to me the value placed on each license it meant to incourage infringers to resolve the situtation not litigate. IMO."

IMO, applying pressure for huge settlements is the whole point. And, from our point of view, it is fair. These infringing companies have made a few bucks by virtue of (knowingly) infringing these patents. Bucks measured in billions. So what is "fair". If someone stole your property and used it as the basis for their entire multi-billion dollar business, how much of that you you deserve? IMO, their business is rightfully YOURS. Asking 5% of their gross is well within reason, IMO.

And IMO, our team is indeed pressing for huge settlements - hence the T3 litigation.

As for the "Troll" label, IMO that label would be applied equally whether a settlement were for one million, ten million or a hundred million. The people applying that label simply don't want to pay - at all. They may talk of huge money being the problem, but never draw a line - how much is too much (when you don't want to pay a dime)?

All that said, each license is the result of a negotiation. Ask high, accept something less in order to resolve and move on. But don't give it away, and keep in mind that each settlement amount establishes (or contributes to) a new precedent for future pricing.

JMHOs,

SGE