milestone / Re: BUSHleague / Re: billwilkie & emtnester / Re: Second response
posted on
Apr 30, 2008 11:15AM
First, let me correct my comment as I wrote "omission of information" but intended "inclusion" of information.
Now, considering there has been no inclusion of information about on-going revenues or recurring payments, and considering the "material information" requirements I cited in my previous post and the revenue recognition clause that you cite (and that Ken from Hawk loves to cite, I might add lol), we should assume that there are no ongoing royalty payment structures or recurring revenue payment structures associated with any licenses to date.