Anything is "possible", but all of this conjecture is resting on the word "grant", a word that PTSC has clarified means the same as purchased or licensed. The only people that seem to be looking backwards are us, the PTSC investors. It seems to me that TPL, PTSC, Moore, the J's have left 2007 behind and have gotten on with their respective business.

As SGE pointed out, this is not worth re-arguing, so I'll leave it alone after this post, I was just pointing out for l2007s that per the company's statements, the J's are MMP licensees. In my opinion, the reason there is a "business resolution" as opposed to a simple "license purchase" in this case is simply that these companies were litigants. It was simply more complicated than Toshiba, JVC, Matsushita and NEC America to drop the lawsuit, and then sign a license agreement, since the court was involved, and likely based on the status of the re-exams at the time, not much incentive for the J's to do so. Also, PTSC & TPL were the litigants, yet PDS is the licensing/patent ownership entity so a "business arrangement" was likely necessary to spell it all out and assure all the steps happened. IMO, PTSC cut them strongly discounted deal (I think they likely paid around $18M to $22M for their licenses in total) and decided to fight another day with the other 250, or 450, or 600, or 2000 or whatever the number is of possible infringers.

I worry that all this talk about "potential" money coming in from a 2 year old settlement raises false hope for people and clouds their ability to judge their investment and their company properly. The only thing that seems to support the "delusions" is innuendo and interpretation, no real facts, and the conjecture seems to fly in the face of what has been officially stated and filed with the SEC, by the company. Ultimately though, everyone is entitled to their opinion, so no point in further rehashing what is obviously deeply entrenched opinions.

I'd prefer to look forward and try to hold our company to a standard of communication and transparency, and ultimately of performance that allows us to understand and judge our investment, and make educated decisions, not crapshoots based on things they haven't said. I hope the current events are a step toward that, though I'm wary of prolonged silence for public companies. It rarely results in positives. I hope PTSC is the exception that proves the rule.