My goodness, Snoop. You`ve outdone yourself this time. As you can see from the Subject title of this post I`m here to address the Highly Unlikelies that are in your post. By the way, I say they are highly unlikely to be politically correct for the board. My own opinion is that you are just downright lieing.

Point by point, you suggest you obtained information from one of the infringers by telling a sales or engineering person there that you work for a large manufacturer interested in using their chip for a new design. This suggests that you either really do work for a large manufacturer or that the person(s) you talked to didn`t bother to verify that fact. If you do work for a manufacturer in the position you suggest your motives here become highly suspect, especially given that you own no PTSC stock. Stating a sales or engineering person gave you HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL information regarding the negotiotions without verifying who you are comes under the HIGHLY UNLIKELY title. Even if they were able to verify that you work for a large manufacturer I find it HIGHLY UNLIKELY that they would have even known the info you are talking about, let alone been willing to share that information. The words Grounds for Dismissal come immediately to mind.

Now, how would a sales or engineering person even be aware of the info you are talking about? Either you are saying that this company disseminates this info to company personnel not involved in the negotiations themselves (HIGHLY UNLIKELY) or that the person you talked to was actually involved in the negotiations (if he/she was, HIGHLY UNLIKELY they would be ALLOWED to discuss the details).

So, Intel has CD ROm`s with prior art? Yet they decided to pay TPL/PTSC in the eight figure range to settle. This isn`t just HIGHLY UNLIKELY it`s downright stupid, as previously pointed out by moxa.

So let`s pretend that there actually are these alleged CD ROM`s. They are circulating in Japan? Yeah, happens all the time, one defendant giving information to another defendant who happens to be a competitor, to help out their case. Excuse me, but I think it HIGHLY UNLIKELY that there is anything but an You`re On Your Own Mentality in a case like this. Now I could be wrong, but I find it HIGHLY UNLIKELY.

As for Russel Fish, for all we know he hired an attorney in Dallas to represent him in a DUI case. Your post offers nothing but innuendo.