Best I can gather, there are 111 MMP licenses sold/settled to date including the HTC verdict.

Of those, we can ascertain either through PRs or names revealed during the various legal proceedings brought by the individuals that Dan Leckrone tried to screw, 96 named companies who licensed the MMP.

That leaves +/-15 licensees who remain anonymous. Who are they?

PTSC & TPL have tried to claim that's at the request of the licensinng companies, but CLEARLY, based on all of the crap that both TPL and PTSC have pulled, this secretiveness is purely to keep the heat off of TPL and PTSC management by hiding large companies who have signed for peanuts, or whose license fees have been diverted to other portfolios / pockets. The Apple license is only the most obvious example of something that TPL tried to keep quiet, and that PTSC went along with in an effort to keep shareholders in the dark, and prevent us from unitiing and confronting them and holding them accountable. Bohemoths like GE and John Deere are other examples of licenses that PTSC BOD/Management tried to keep secret from shareholders EVEN AFTER shareholders confronted them with the knowledge that they had in fact signed.

This board is a perfect example of their successful efforts to keep shareholders at bay as shown by the example of the battles on these very issues here on this board and others. They've successfully reduced investors to suspecting and focussing on holding other investors accountable, rather than the managers who actually can do something about the company's success/failure. Amazingly, even at this time, that mindset/paradigm continues.

As many of you know, I've kept a spreadsheet of the licenses. In addition to that, I've kept a list of the top 100 electronics companies as of 2006, based on annual revenues. I've done because our company has expressly refused to provide this info to shareholders. I've also done that as presumably, at least in my non-techie minde, of these 100 companies, all or at least most of them require an MMP license. This list doesn't even include all of the other peripheral industries that require MMP licenses. In my opinion, this is one of the most positive aspects of the MMP licensing program that I've considered in holding my investement because, of that list of 100, by my count, ONLY 30 of the 100 have signed MMP licenses. Additionally, this list includes all of the companies that have paid the largest license fees to date.

That means, there are STILL close to 70 of 100 LARGE ELECTRONICS COMPANIES still needing MMP licenses! Some of them are in litigation with us and some of them have been REMARKABLY out of sight. It's interesting to note that HTC doesn't even make that list!! So, considering the courts awarded the MMP $960K for only a portion of HTC's infringing products, and that in reality, PDS should still get an all encompassing license for much more from HTC, it would seem that you can consider any of the 70 still unsigned companies as being on the hook for at least $2M and I would think even at $10M, it would be a huge discount for the larger ones.

That being said, how many of these 15 (or perhaps more) licensees that PTSC has kept secret from their shareholders, are part of the 70? There are 32 of the top 50 that, at least publicly, remain unsigned! We know some of them are still in litigation, so we can be pretty sure they haven't signed still. However, are the 15 all part of the top 50? Bottom 50? On the list at all?

IS IT ETHICAL AND PROPER TO WITHHOLD THIS TYPE OF BASIC INFO FROM SHAREHOLDERS?

The argument has been presented that it's done at the licensse's request. It's also been argued that it's done to keep companies that are in negotiations from getting any extra edge.

CLEARY, the reality is that it's been done either out of ineptness, or to HIDE the unethical and castraophic lack of proper stewardship by PTSC and alleged fraudulent activities of TPL.

While I'm sure Cliff, Gloria and Carlton would mockingly laugh if they were to read this, I would hope that they would provide an update of these "unknown" licensees, and/or an update of who is still targeted for licensing, so that investors can analyze their current investment better, and/or potential investors can have something more to entice them than infighting and legal battles amongst business partners, inventors, and investors.

Wouldn't it be attractive to a potential investor to KNOW that the likes of DELL, IBM, Samsung, Siemens, Cisco, Hitachi, etc. etc., are still in need of an MMP license, and that those 6 companies alone might represent $50M - $100M in revenues?

Anyone care to update any missing info based on the list below? The green highlighted names are the licensees to date as best I've been able to corral in limited time.