(Total Views: 363)
Posted On: 09/11/2017 11:46:49 PM
Post# of 82676
Anyone notice this in today's 8K:
"the Company settled certain patent litigation through a Release and License Agreement in which certain patents were licensed to Microsoft Corporation, and the Company received a non-disclosable one time lump sum payment."
How could it still be "non-disclosable"? Since in the last 10Q they stated:
https://www.otcmarkets.com/edgar/GetFilingPdf...D=12230952
"On March 28, 2013, we initiated patent litigation against an outside party. On January 15, 2016, the parties reached a settlement in the matter. As part of the settlement, we received a payment in January 2016 of $9,750,000 and incurred fees related to the settlement of $4,187,257."
Does anyone find this strange? Is there more to the settlement since they state "As part of the settlement"? Is it still "non-disclosable" because of the royalty payments mentioned in press reports - or is there more to the settlement which we haven't seen yet?
"the Company settled certain patent litigation through a Release and License Agreement in which certain patents were licensed to Microsoft Corporation, and the Company received a non-disclosable one time lump sum payment."
How could it still be "non-disclosable"? Since in the last 10Q they stated:
https://www.otcmarkets.com/edgar/GetFilingPdf...D=12230952
"On March 28, 2013, we initiated patent litigation against an outside party. On January 15, 2016, the parties reached a settlement in the matter. As part of the settlement, we received a payment in January 2016 of $9,750,000 and incurred fees related to the settlement of $4,187,257."
Does anyone find this strange? Is there more to the settlement since they state "As part of the settlement"? Is it still "non-disclosable" because of the royalty payments mentioned in press reports - or is there more to the settlement which we haven't seen yet?
(0)
(0)Scroll down for more posts ▼
