Voip Pal Com Inc (VPLM)

[nyt]

No one said ANYTHING about a lack of trust or the veracity of the law firm, least not me. Leave it to a few here to always suggest something else or twist a clear point or question to look like it was something else. The point was brought up a week or 2 ago about how the list of companies was published in the white paper & subsequently names removed. Then a few, including myself have questioned why so? It is no small thing potentially. The potential infringers lies at the heart of the value of the patents. It seems fairly reasonable that there was some legal advice, after the fact, advising that those names had to go. That is more than a mere "hmmm" moment. It's potentially huge. On the other hand, it could've just been a more benign request or advice to not antagonize the situation at this sensitive & critical time, that the minds must be trying their best to ascertain the true scope of control of the patents.

My apologies if I'm overreacting to your thing about trusting the law firm & all that. Words are too often misconstrued and/or twisted here so...

But anyway, all I am saying, and nothing more, is that I think it's important to know why the names were removed. And I would like to know if others here think it's no big deal.