As I wrote in my previous post, if in fact you meant funds, that scenario would not make sense as to signing a contingent license. Instead you would write a license with no contingency and simply provide for a Note to be paid by the licensee or some other such funding arrangement. In that case the revenues and associated receivable would be recorded instead of waiting for some contingency milestone to be achieved. Why would any licensor agree to a contingency that has nothing to do with the business at hand (licensing and whether one infringes). That's like saying they are agreeing that the licensee infringes only if whatever financing you are talking about goes through. Which is why the implication from your post is that you think the issuance of stock is generating revenues.

Perhaps Ron could explain a little further why no licensor would ever sign the kind of license you are talking about.

Not that I want to get into any lengthy discussion as I have things to do, but I agree with Opty as far as the possibility of a contingency being linked to the results of a Markman. I can certainly see a scenario where the lawyers agree that if a Markman term is ruled one way, you infringe and pay X amount of dollars. And if it's ruled another way you don't infringe and owe nothing - or a different amount because you infringe on a different number of patent claims.

Again, perhaps Ron could give some input on that point. However, you'll have to ask him yourself as he doesn't read my posts.