While I can understand TPL`s desire for confidentiality regarding licensing fees garnered (it could still impact ongoing negotiations, assuming they are targeting much bigger numbers from next licensees), and I could also understand PTSC`s ``advantage`` in keeping the numbers ``mum`` (possible disappointments but, if not, and they`re reasonably large, the PPS pops and share buy-back, assuming it`s underway, is hampered), there is one argument I have with their interpretation of the SEC ``material events`` reporting rule.

It sure seems to me that when company with what, seven employees, and no OH to speak of makes a deal where $10+M goes straight to the bottom line with virtually no associated expense or effort required, THAT IS A MATERIAL EVENT! Even a big name company, if it had the good fortune to collect such a windfall (multiple times) under such circumstances and such was not necessarily ``unusual`` for that company, would IMO be obligated to report the event (and I`m talking companies with $1B+ annual revenues). It`s a lot of money - it is a ``material event`` IMO.

Also, I was under the impression (past readings of SEC regs?) that a ``material event`` is one which an observer would reasonably expect to significantly affect share value - positive or negative. I believe one reason for that reg`s existence is to avoid ``issues`` that could impact the SEC in instances where say, an investor with significant holdings dumped his/her shares only to later (much later) discover that the company willfully withheld information from shareholders. That shareholder, who could have made a bundle had the information been shared, can pursue the company (and perhaps the overseeing SEC) as liable for their perceived ``loss``.

Finally, it seems that, with several new licensees where numbers have not been reported, a ``gross`` number could be shared without impacting anything. That is, unless even the ``gross`` number is disgustingly low. That aside, I would think TPL`s efforts would not be hampered. However, such reporting (assuming decent numbers) could upset PTSC`s share buy-back program (assuming it`s underway - in a stealth/casual way, otherwise the PPS would naturally rise due to the buy-side pressure).

Right now I`m looking for a PR that simply says ``The XX companies listed below have licensed the MMP Patent Portfolio``, followed with a list of a bunch of companies, big and small. IMO this is not too unreasonable to hope for, considering that they reported that ``dozens`` of companies were clammering to sign up.

But I KNOW nuttin`!

SGE