Ask HN: When would you do when a big company "breaches contract"

Lets assume you have a royalty and IP agreement on a specific product with one of the world's two biggest companies (According to Forbes 2010). You've been trying to come to some sort of IP buyout arrangement for 6 months. At the eleventh hour you find out informally from a mate that they have already licensed that software without honouring the royalty. The buyout terms you've previously said "look perfect" have a clause that renders the agreement "null and void from the outset" - you haven't signed. You spend 7 days of dead wall correspondence trying to work out if they have done the dodgy. However, very senior management decline to confirm it. You've spent 7 days trying to find a good law firm that doesn't have a 'conflict' in representing you. Assume: * they played hardball in the original negotiations and took you down from a fair price of 100 * x to 50 * x and then much lower. * they are in "Fundamental breach of Contract" and you are thinking of suing for punitive damages (assume this is possible). What is your aim for a settlement? 1) Push for a 100 * x settlement. 2) Push for punitive damages (i.e. risk going to court) even if you don't feel you deserve the money. 3) Take them for everything. 4) Don't play hardball, they'll find a way to screw you. 5) Other. Note: You meet with your legal representation for the first time tomorrow. Since then you've been on your own (whilst trying to find a good firm that doesn't have a conflict). I'm interested in getting a feeling for how hard you would push. My culture is not one that seeks too much revenge, justice is enough. Do other cultures feel the same? What are peoples' balance points between justice, punishment, revenge, greed and renumeration? How would you justify taking more than you actually deserve?