Mr. Steeler wrote:

"Afterall, if the company remains in a mode that "we get the most that we can get" rather than some actual real and publicizable per infringement unit fee structure that legitimizes the MMP, then it not only lends credence to the "patent troll" perception, but it also leaves them in a position of no accountabilty as there is no way to really measure if the successes they do have are above or below the performance line. It would seem that with multiple apparent Markman Ruling wins and a litany of successful USPTO re-exams, there should be no reason that the MMP shouldn't bring a known fee per infringement unit, provided the infringement is proven either through licensing or litigation."

I don't know where to begin with the above BOLDED statement. Your last sentence is IMO, unworkable, unrealistic, and probably several more "un's" that escapes me at the moment. Shareholders are not privy as to how TPL establishes value for the MMP for each company - piecemeal and/or whole for each alleged infringer. That is very sensitive information. Each case is different. The business environment is very fluid. Products come and go. Why would TPL want their marketing strategy public?? This logic escapes me.

IMO, there should never be a standard pricing unit. I would always advocate a flexible pricing model depending on the product involved, length of infringement of that individual product, company sales of that product, is the product new or old?, a sales leader for the company?, competition, market penetration, uniqueness? number of chips that go into the product and product line, estimated company risk if the product is suspended from selling said product i.e - court injunction., etc.. There are sooooo many variables.. My Bottom line is that if I were TPL, I would want as much flexibility as possible when going after each separate infringer.

The MMP is IMO, a "Fountation Patent", meaning without the MMP, Life as we know it would be very different without it. As such, with the proper marketing and enforcement a premium price may be obtained for alleged infringement, especially in light of recent Markman Constructions. However, the fact we do not have as yet a Court decision confirming infringement is a limiting factor to date. Sometime in the future a Court determination against someone will provide further strength to the MMP if/when TPL decides to go to the mat and/or set an example of some high profile company. There are several good candidates in the "ITC 13" for example. For argument sake, I will not go into past marketing/enforcement actions by PTSC/TPL which is another discussion altogether.

As an aside, I believe it would be a good discussion for this Agora Board to provide links and/or delve into historical Patent pricing (if any information is publically available) in the current business environment.

Jaded and no longer dissappointed..Virt