"obtained a license and release on e.Digital's foreign and domestic patent rights, including the Company's Flash-R™ patent portfolio, and e.Digital obtained a license and release on certain Samsung patents."

We can't determine if e.Digital products are involved in the Samsung release, however, most likely it relates.

The Casio issue is more decisive ....

"Casio obtained a license and release on all e.Digital foreign and domestic patent rights, including the Company's Flash-R™ patent portfolio, and e.Digital obtained a license and release on any Casio patents that cover e.Digital's current product line."

Olympus, on the other hand, has no cross licensing and there appears to be no ongoing issues with e.Digital products.

"Olympus obtained a license and release on all e.Digital foreign and domestic patent rights, including the Company's Flash-R™ patent portfolio, and e.Digital received a one-time licensing fee."

The way I see Olympus, I see a lot of camera companies that have been forced to moved form film to digital.....they lack interfacing tech to complement their direct digital developments, if they have that.

I put there voice recording efforts in the same boat, as they moved from tape to digital.

I figure Olympus does not have the stable of IP a Samsung has, and might be more inclined to climb on board with e.Digital.

Why Samsung and Casio are not highlighted as Olympus still begs the question of why?

Is it because they took an assignment of the security patent?

doni