Ann: Prospectus - Convertible Notes, page-48

"Section 4.3 is grim reading indeed."

At some point this misleading commentary must cease.

Seriously - which part of section 4.3 causes you concern (as someone who does not hold remember)?

Fact - what is noted in section 4.3 is a reasonably standard summation of risks. Dare I say it but some may not have even been listed as not all contingencies are foreseeable. Some of those noted are particular to TV2. Notwithstanding that many similar sentences appear in any number of prospectuses issued y a range of public companies.

For the sake of clarity - I assume your are referring to the IP section?

I appreciate that IP law is not your area of expertise. However, your characterisation as 'grim reading' is misleading and reprehensible.

Rather than defend the entire section - can I ask which sentence / paragraph causes you to declare the entire section as 'grim reading'?

I will then provide a broad legal clarification and or rebuttal to your claims. Fact is - you have made the claim of 'grim reading' now I ask that you support that claim with some further substantiation. If you can not do that then I would advise most on here to simply ignore your claim of 'grim reading'.