Mr. Watts,
Thanks for the information. I read it in your past posts as well.
1. I believe, as others have indicated, it's illegal to give a shareholder information about an amendment that has not been released to the public. In this I would concur with Yamasushi.
2. I know you have provided some accusations regarding the integrity of Liquidmetal's upper management on this board. Therefore, why would liquidmetal upper management feel compelled to disclose such vital information to a shareholder that has repeatedly raised questions about their character, and management abilities?
3. I don't think we as shareholders know enough about the original licensing agreement, or this amendment to be able to predict accurately what benefits might be in this relationship for Liquidmetal with Apple. Isn't it possible that Salas gave you partial information regarding the amendment?
These above issues lead me to believe that there could be more to this amendment than is being suggested by your post. No offense intended.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
