I think there were good reasons to reduce transparency as unpopular as this decision was. I don't know that announcing pathetic license fees and letting everyone know that license negotiations had stopped pending the outcome of the USPTO reexaminations would have been in the best interests of PTSC or TPL in a time when it appears TPL was practicly giving away licenses to support their financial burden. If TPL is financially in trouble as Moore indicated, then it may have only been the non taransparency that kept a few licenses coming in to keep the doors open.

Moving forward post 336 recertification it makes sence to keep the numbers non transparent to keep other companies in the dark as to how much the license fees have gone up. In this way TPL can perhaps extract even more money from infringers that don't know how much other companies are paying now. I can see the logic. I know as an investor its frustrating because we want to know all the details but that isn't necessarily the best way to run the licensing program going forward. I believe that PTSC and TPL are doing the right thing in the PR's they are giving us clues without going into details. The Q's will provide us with the dollars eventually and if the numbers are good which we expect they will eventually be, then the SP will follow.

As far as PDSG is concerned, It would be great to get a little more transparency on what is happening .

All the best,

Steve