I had previously wrote:

Considering that EVERY Country in the world is infringing on the MMP and practically every industry that incorporates Digital Technology the revenues could exceed trillions, then add to that the royalties.... recurring and renewable contracts.....

Just think of this:

In other countries you have the following applications:

Government Run Systems

Military Applications from foreign governments as well as the USA

Science (Hadron Collider) uses the MMP

Guided Missiles USE the MMP

Cell Phones, TV, Cars, Printers, Cameras, Scanners, Bluetooth devices, calculators, Ipad, Iphones, androids, computer monitors, microwaves, regrigerators, garage door openers, Nasa products, Trains, Planes, Trucks, every freakn digital device out there is on the hook, as well as government entities across the world.

SGE emailed me privately and alerted me to something I was not aware and its true:

"The issue of US (and Foreign) Government liability for patent infringement has come up several times over the years, and I have posted something most people apparently don't know: the US Government typically will not accept/execute a contract with a supplier/prime contractor unless the contract contains a Patent Indemnification Clause in it's Terms & Conditions. Simply put, the Government does not want to have anything to do with patent infringement difficulties and insists on their suppliers to bear that potential liability.

Likewise, Prime Contractors, and even lower-tier contractors typically include a Patent Indemnification Clause in their subcontracts. Ultimately, somebody in the supply chain bears responsibility and accountability, but virtually NEVER the US Government (unless the buying agency, e.g., the US Navy, obtains a waiver from the agency head or the Secretary of Defense or equivalent).

I suspect Foreign Governments operate similarly.

So the targets are not Governments, but those who supply Governments (recall the Government itself rarely builds anything itself, but contracts to have things built).

And there are a LOT of targets, and many if not all major contractors/subcontractors not only buy infringing chips but also develop/manufacture "special purpose" chips in house.”

OK I accept the correction, however Please Consider this and correct me if I am wrong you stated:

“I suspect Foreign Governments operate similarly.”

We being a US company will most likely go after the suppliers of the technology to the US Government, however because foreign governments are “foreign” they are still subject to the enforcement of the Patents very much like we are going after the end users of the MMP like Barnes and Noble, foreign governments are responsible just as much as Barnes and Noble, LG and or Samsung.

Because its up to them to verify that the technology they are using does not infringe on patents, they would have to sue their suppliers of the systems, but they would have to pay our licensing fee. So IMHO it’s a Win Win for us.