Considering that in the past, I believe the company has classified even the one-time fees as "royalties", I'm not sure that it does mean what you are inferring.

HOWEVER, if it indeed DOES mean that, then per RegFD, the company would need to disclose that as it would meet the standard of affecting a reasoable investor's investment decisions and would significantly alter the mix of info.

If that's the case, PTSC should have simultaneously released the info. If they want to claim the disclosure was un-intentional, then they have 24 hrs from the time that material was released by the lawyers to make a public notification of same to the public. Either way, PTSC should be notifiying shareholders of this change if it is indeed a change.

IMO, in either case, the names of the companies released constitute a material issue, considering the revenue involved, and that should be confirmed or refuted by the company.