Assuming all things being equal (which of course they never are), here is my attempt to compare a specific settlement amount to what EDIG and PTSC would receive given their respective arrangements as I understand them.

Let’s start with 20 billion in (G7 combined) annual revenues from infringing products...

1 percent of that is 200 million. 0.1 percent is 20 million - which is about what I think a company might consider settling for. But wait; that’s just one year, so let’s assume the settlement could be multiplied by 5 again to account for at least 5 years worth of actual infringement. It would probably be more than that considering past and future, but leaving plenty of room for negotiation let’s just say that we could settle for 100 million total from the G7. It’s a nice round number anyway and easy for this exercise.

Now figure 100 million less costs of say, 10 million (which is a LOT of ‘costs’) = 90 million to split 60/40 with DM. That’s for a settlement - no appeal. EDIG would get 54 million and DM gets 36 million.

What if this was PTSC getting the same settlement?

100 million split 50/50 with TPL = 50 million less costs of say only 5 million (for PTSC’s share) = 45 million

In the above scenerio, EDIG gets 9 million more that PTSC would for the same settlement amount - so EDIG has the better deal, no?

This was just meant as a simple exercise mainly to illustrate the difference in the arrangements of the two companies (as well as to show what a full-scale settlement win against the G7 might add to EDIG’s bottom line). But feel free to rip it apart everyone!

- Sinkman