Your explanation sounds more plausible than most but I'd clarify two points. For starters, I don't believe the NEC dismissal order was tied to any MOU, just the Toshiba/Matsushita/JVC order. Corrections welcome.

Secondly, the plaintiffs case was dismissed with predujice, and the defendants without prejudice, meaning the plaintiffs can't come back, so if your scenario holds water, it seems that it would cover Toshiba or Matsushita so that new/different/future products would be covered by the original agreement . Or perhaps the converse is that if TPL/PTSC were to go after them in the future, they could contest it in Ward's court.

BTW, was in Pittsburgh for the Viqueens game. Great weekend, and what a game. Still hoarse. Looks like it's gonna be another long season in Pittburgh, and by that I mean playing into February. Sorry about your Dodgers. Watch out for my Penguins & Celtics!