Have you ever been involved in a multi-facetted negotiation? Are you familiar with common negotiation ploys?

The following is predicated to a degree on things we think we know, but don't know absolutely. Specifically, that there has been a settlement with Barco.

In a negotiation, it is common practice to pick on one element, where there is perceived weakness for your adversary, and focus all attention on that element. Every time you sit down to negotiate, you can't get past that one element. Stalemate.

How do you effectively get past the stalemate? You take the element of contention off the table. Now the focus shifts to your elements of perceived strength, and things progress.

This could answer your questions: "Why would they agree to give Barco a pass [on the '584]?" and "What did we get in return?". Further, on the "What did we get in return?", perhaps - ultimately - a good faith negotiation and a settlement.

Now, assuming a settlement has been reached, it's reasonable to assume that the settlement included a license for the MMP. The entire MMP, including the '584. The issues you raise re: the '584 become moot. The concessions made previously on the '584 are no longer an issue. And if they licensed the MMP sans the '584, the basic outcome would be the same.

JMHO,

SGE