You say ``oh i get it sge. apprently you are of the mindset that anything can be posted in a pr or a website is fair game. there is the concept in truth in advertising and truth in the information supplied to the shareholder.

tpl can negotiate with those tactics but the information

supplied to shareholders via pr`s and the website are to

be taken as factual....not a negotiating tool. i think

you are confused as to what is a business maneuver in

negotiations and the information supplied to the public.

t`moto``

So yeah, I guess that`s my mindset.... But your ``concepts`` appear confused. ``Advertising``? What is TPL advertising other than a negotiation? ``truth in the information supplied to the shareholder``? What shareholder? TPL is a private company. Yes, IMO they can and should use those tactics - it`s ultimately in PTSC shareholder best interest. It`s TPL`s site, they have no shareholders. Their expressed ``shoot for the moon`` negotiating target can be whatever they want as a prelude to negotiation. Again, what`s supplied to the public doesn`t really matter. They`re a private company and beholden to no one. After all, what is the purpose of the TPL Web site? It`s designed to be looked at by who? Think about it.... It`s purpose and design is for it to be looked at by infringers, and nobody else, because to them, nobody else matters, and nobody else should matter to them except for those infringers they intend to enter negotiations with. And I`d bet that when they first sit down with an infringer, royalties are on the table and they allow them to be negotiated away in an effort to extract a bigger licensing fee. So how is their Web site-stated target in any way untruthful? They say they offer a deal involving both a licensing fee and royalties, and they probably do. But to get the deal done, they drop the royalties for more fee. Basically, they`re saying ``we want this and it`s up to you, Mr. Infringer, to negotiate us down`` (which is the infringer`s quest).

If they`ve done anything ``wrong``, it`s letting the cat out of the bag as to what they`re really willing to accept in negotiations. But where did they do it? At a PTSC shareholder meeting. Were there hords of infringing company reps on hand? Probably not. Is there any written record available to infringers? Only here (like they`d look to a PTSC message board for pre-negotiation ammo).

As for things said in PTSC PRs, nothing wrong there either. Certainly PTSC would prefer to receive fees AND royalties. But they aren`t the ones sitting at the negotiating table.

Much ado about nothing....

SGE