As I read this (from a post made yesterday I think), I have the impression that some may be misunderstanding this statement in patent law (or I am!). Some seem to believe that this (or other statements of law) mean that if one co-inventor sells or licenses rights to a patent, the other co-inventor receives nothing. My interpretation is that the co-inventors share benefits of the sale/license, though it ``only takes one`` to make the deal. So even if Moore sold or licensed, PTSC should share in the benefits, and that is the extent to which PTSC is at Mooore`s ``mercy``. Please correct me if I`m wrong.

BTW, to substantiate my conclusions here, if one co-inventor could sell/license and the other co-inventor receive no benefit, Moore would have no leg to stand on in the instant case as co-inventor Fish sold patent rights previously. Hope that makes sense....

SGE