Obviously, the agreement does not include disclosing who the manufacturer is or he would have.

Another smart legal move maybe?

Let the future infringers wonder who the licesensee is, thinking...maybe we should do same and save all the expense and hassle?

Just a thought....clever ploy on DM's part IMO.

At the 2009 SHM they mentioned that some companies had approached them for a license, we asked who, and the reply was "we cannot discuss it."

This is the 1st however, they have admitted in a Q, and maybe even the only one?