"We licensed elements of MicroOS™ included in the Flash-R™ patent portfolio to the seven companies that settled with us in the first round of filings. We did not license or provide source code to MicroOS in it’s current configuration to any of these companies."

We know that MicroOS has been improved upon over time (version 2.0, 3.0, etc.). Given the claims that are included within the existing patents (which were granted over 10 ten years ago), not all of the capabilities in the current MicroOS would be protected by those patents... and indeed may not even be patentable. Some of the newer elements/capabilities of MicroOS might be protected under the DRM patent (currently "patent pending"). Regardless, I’m pretty sure that whatever elements are not protected by patents (as part of Flash-R) would still be considered as trade secrets.

http://www.1000ventures.com/business_guide/ipr/sme_guide_trade_secrets_bywipo.html

What I believe Robert is saying in his response is that the patented elements of MicroOS were licensed but the un-patented elements (e.Digital’s trade secrets) of MicroOS were not licensed nor shared... which would make perfect sense to me. The patents are the issue here with respect to DM’s efforts. e.Digital would still want to protect their trade secrets to the best of their ability for whatever competitive advantage that might afford them in the future.

- Sinkman