<The logic that Barco settled contingent on some future event is akin to the MOU concept in the J3 settlement>

Well, NO.It isn't.

There is a requirement that contingent revenue licenses be disclosed only when payment becomes more likely than not.This disclosure was included in all financial reports subsequent to the first Markman results.If it were not the first Markman event that created the changed outlook for those license milestone payments, then what?

I suspect the Supplemental Markman, which was disclosed in the First Markman results, would be the defining event for the purposes of determing if any milestones have been met requiring payments.So the first Markman was sufficient to disclose (more likely than not), but we knew then the Markman was not Final.The court posted the Supplemental Markman results in early December, however we did not consider that Final until late December when we learned HTC was not going to motion for additional constructions.I think such milestone payments tied to an MMP License would now fall under contract law and hopefully would contain penalties high enough to avoid the possibility of more litigation.

While no contingent money appears to have been collected by PDS as of Jan 14th,I assume the licensees have a certain amount of time to pay after notification that milestone payments are required.So I expect to see those revenues in the coming qtrly financial report.

Well, all in my opinion, FWIW.

Opty