You make an excellent point in this "win/lose/draw" discussion, which goes perfectly with my posts today.

Our objective was to secure licenses with all of the Js. We accomplished our objective. Win? Draw? Loss?

The Js objective was to avoid licensing the MMP. They licensed. Win? Draw? Loss?

SGE

------------------------------------...

The rest I find rather laughable. Refusing to discuss anything with the "ignorant", with all his vast experience in litigation - NONE of it being patent litigation. "The ignorant", with 20+ years of experience in corporate contracting, recognizing that each and every license is a contract - including the ones with the Js. And tell us again about that MOU....and how it was necessary for the purpose Brian and Ron perscribe.

Posing IMO legitimate questions about all the wierdnesses surrounding the settlement with the Js, actively soliciting criticism, comments, anything, is seen as "spin-doctoring". NOTE TO ALL, never, ever, make an observation, speculate or pose a question, as that is considered "spin-doctoring". Just listen to the one voice, and believe. Never question it, just believe.

Ultimately, it'll all come out in the wash. No need to address this "noise" any further, IMO.

SGE