You are making statements as if they are more than just your opinion.

It is my understanding that the Matsushita settlement was not considered "gross" because both TPL and PTSC were licensors in that particular situation for whatever reason.

Why would the judge make such a distiction? If PDS as licensor did not supply the necessary distinction needed by the court, wouldn't copying the Matsushita license utilizing duel licensors be a simple way to avoid paying 3.5% on the total amount?

Opty