I believe folks here are jumping to certain conclusions without considering the established patent enforcement process (in the USA - differs in Europe to a degree).

The process as I understand it:

The patent owner does whatever it takes to identify products/manufacturers/retailers who are suspected of patent infringement.

The patent owner conducts reverse engineering and analysis to verify infringement and document the basis of this conclusion specifying patent claims infringed and products impacted. This consitutes a data package.

The patent owner, through his in-house or contracted legal representation, sends a legal Notice to each infringing entity advising of specified infringement and provides a copy of the data package as a basis for the claim(s) of infringement, and solicits negotiation with the recognized threat of litigation. That is, provide an opportunity to negotiate before initiating action through the courts.

Here I must note that the Notice is the starting point, legally, for any future claims of damages. That is, if they wind up in a court battle, the patent owner can only claim damages for PAST infringement from the date of legal notice to the present date (at conclusion of litigation) or the date of patent expiration, which ever comes first.

If solicition doesn't work or if negotaition fails, after consideration, the patent owner may bring suit against the infringing entity.

Now, considering the above, who is doing the marketing?

IMO, EDIG via or in concert/cooperation with Handal and any assisting (subcontracted by Handal). Same answer to "who's doing the negotiating?".

And I agree with Black Labs Rule. While there may be hallway discussions between lawyers regarding other patents suspected of infringement, such discussion probably would not be commingled formally. However, the parties may ultimately opt to "bundle" the negotiation.

Here, again, remember PROCESS. The infringer of multiple patents will have received Notice of Infrinement from us for each patent infringed (or each "family" of patents). It's not like or attorney would say, during formal negotiations regarding one infringement claim, "by the way, we've got these other patents that we think you infringe...". The appropriate method of providing such advice is through a legal Notice and accompanying data package, as it is the only method that holds any water.

I hope this is helpful, and I hope anything seriously wrong with the above description of the process is discussed. I'm open to correction!

SGE