that is my point...also the 10Q does not state how many royalty agmts there are...previously the 10Q (i believe DID state how many)...i am only saying that if it was a one time payment, defendants would probably want that info in PR....so it might be a royalty agmt..the other alternative, maybe, would be no money was paid, which i doubt, especially because i do not believe we would settle for no money AND the panasonic agmt was BEFORE>..partial MH order.

just saying it could be a royalty agmt...