Wouldn't it make sense to "attempt" to prey on the wireless industry minnows ($2 to $10 billion infringers) and try and persuade them to pay, via a negotiation strategy, what it would cost to go all the way to trial at the NDoC. From reading the cost to go to trial in a federal court relating to complex intellectual property cases, we might be able to persuade these wireless indistry minnows to pay 5 to 10 million for the cost to litigate. If we were able to get 3 to 5 companies in this sector to license for the cost equivalent to full legal costs, the sector average should go up significantly, somewhat negating the apple license. Hopefully we could get maybe 5 to 10 minnows as, again, theoretically they would want to license and move on while preserving the mid to large companies. Another idea, which I believe is a nonstarter, is that the "Agility" version of the full Apple license be "exposed" to show the "full" details of the Apple license. As long as no wrong doing was exposed and PTSC said they sued but everything was settled and no "criminal" activity transpired, Agility should be able to focus on the infringment even if they explain the Apple license and by doing so painting the Leckrones in a worse light than they did against HTC. Back to the original Apple CAP, hopefully the minnows would be more expense conscientious and not want to spend money on attorneys and just pay the 10 million. Lastly, when we found out we were asking for 10 million, it certainly is possible we didn't want to appear to the jury as obnoxious patent trolls so we tried to make the licensing amount as reasonable as possible to make it "easier" for the jury to find in our favor.