Here is the bottom line. You or I don't know what was agreed to (in total). Could something other than cash been part of the deal as DL suggested? Why would he make such a statement if only to ward off arguments that the license was almost 'given away". I agree that DL would do anything if pushed to do so (i.e. cash strapped and looking at not continuing on as a going concern).

I see your point and it is clear. I also agree that the license was probably improperly comingled with the TPL license agreements (and was referenced in the PTSC / TPL litigation).

Do you see my point and those of others?