Well, actually, until recently, there was an ownership dispute over the MMP. But in reality, that has nothing to do with the core issue of infringement.
Sorry to be a broken record, but people simply must learn not to be guided solely by what the Company says in its "headers", PRs, and so forth, or what its lawyers say in legal filings. What do you expect --- that PTSC would say, "our patented intellectual property is actually useless to virtully every microprocessor design", or that our lawyers would say there really hasn't been any infringment? Of course not. Yet, on the other hand, what they say isn't necessarily what can be proved in a court of law.
There isn't anything else "controlling this process". The simple fact of the matter is that nobody should expect all of the infringers to pay "big bucks" merely because our side says they are infringing. If those companies were concerned about such things in the first place, they would have approached PTSC about purchasing a license prior to manufacturing and/or distributing infringing products, or shortly after being put on notice of same. Instead, many choose to profit from infringing and by requiring that PTSC prove their wrongful conduct in court. It happens every day to lots of companies, not just PTSC, and while it may not be "right", it's not likely to change.
Best wishes to you and all.
