Can you frame your question better? What exactly do you mean by the "same values of MMP licenses as we did in 2006 & 2007". Is that a gross dollar figure of a single license, or an average price of license, or an average price per infringement, or...??

One can argue the HTC license was pretty close to what Casio paid back in 2007. Similarly sized companies who paid similarly sized license fees.

Aside from Apple, it's hard to say if we've had any very large "pure" electronics companies license since 2010 since so many of the names have been kept private. So I guess it's hard to know if we'll see another $31.6M fee like Fujitsu (who by the way paid $5M more while earning less than half of the revenue that HP did at that time).

IMO, I think we can still get a "reasonable royalty rate", either through negoatiation or through litigation, provided we don't continue to shoot ourselves in the foot. In the end, I think the Apple license has proven to be the most detrimental issue to MMP license valuations, not patent reform, or the "patent license environment".

I think the question then is "WHAT IS A REASONABLE ROYALTY RATE FOR THE MMP?" If you can tell me what you think that means and if you think it was higher in 2007 vs now, then perhaps that would clarify what you're asking exactly.

Generally, do I think there could be another $31.6M fee. Sure! Perhaps larger. Depends on who the company is, and how much they infringe, and how the fee is reached (litigation or negotiation). Do I think that it will be harder to achieve going foward? Yes, but mainly due to the MMP team weakness, not the patent environment.

By the way, the Pittsburgh Pirates are the hottest team in Baseball, the Steelers open training camp in less than 3 weeks, and Marcia Brady is currently, and despicably and deservedly so, suspended for 4 games! I'm very relaxed! All is good! :)