<How ironic that if Charles Moore needs the patent he invented and has to pay someone else to get it. Maybe that is what all the heated arguing has been about >

Yes, very much so.

I believe up until today the disagreement between Moore and TPL was thought to be the separate agreement Moore had with TPL. How to split Moore's 50% between them. And that certainly is part of it. But I can see where the master agreement also might come into play as well.

"Chuck Moore has never been employed by TPL"

My understanding is that the master agreement allows only TPL to use the MMP any way they wish - internally. And when those folks were emplyed by TPL, the MMP was never an issue. But they are no longer in TPL's employ and Moore is claiming he was never employed by TPL! Does the master agreement allow Moore to work on chips that include MMP w/o a license to do so? I think we were all under the assumption that all that work within Intellsys was legal because Intellasys was a TPL enterprise and Moore was part of Intellasys.

Was TPL living up to the letter of the master agreement, if Moore's statement is correct? Muddy for sure.

Opty