The larger point is that if you as a business manager are going to willingly and easily pay license fees based on a demand, without knowing what the true market is and has been for the product, then I think you'll be short lived in your position.

I assume as you do, that infringement is being charged based on reverse-engineered evidence of infringment and some multiplier or multiplers particular to that industry/product type. After 4 years of doing it, that this multiplier(s) is still a "state secret" ultimately implies a weakness in their negotiating position, that has yet to be fully overcome IMO

Thank you for answering the 1st paragraph with your 2nd paragraph.

On re-reading the Alliacense PR, I believe that any perceived "weakness" was not in the fee formula but rather waiting for a decision from the USPTO:

hundreds of companies have been awaiting the outcome of US’336 and are now reengaging in licensing discussions

There would now appear to be a strength which wasn't present during the re-exam, in my very humble opinion..

.

.

Be well