wook, I heard a different but comparable story.
It was the PPHM was angling towards producing molecules for small startups at interesting prices but with production commitment if the molecule got somewhere. Allows PPHM to use there new Fast Batch Type change possibilities which in the Stainless Steel multi-use reactor worlds is a mess.
I think no small startup in its right mind would let PPHM/Avid do such production and loose partial control over there molecule. Rights to there molecule, if such start-up holds the IP, is the only thing they have and is what BP normally wants to get its hands on for bread-crumbs.
So I can't really see a small start-up have molecule production for free and loose rights while BP would pay them 20Mil$ for rights and they can produce all molecules they want with that, keep the lights on and have cash left over.
However, if PPHM would have obtained such rights that the USPTO can help us find them because one can search by Assignee PPHM or AVID, because holding IP rights (even partial) gets you in the assignee list.
AND PPHM would be under obligation to tell the public of such contracts because if they produce for free but get something else (rights) in return then this must figure somewhere because Avid has spend money on production and the shareholders are entitled to know where the COUNTER VALUE is. Normally we see this on the balance cheat but holding rights in return for production is a form of payment in kinds.
Maybe those more familiar with reading balance sheet could have a check. In some European countries payment in kinds is an article in the balance sheet.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
