15.	COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Commitments

Leases - On January 2, 2013, the Company entered into a sublease agreement for certain office and administrative space expiring October 31, 2015. Commitments for minimum rentals, not including common charges, under this non-cancelable lease at the end of 2014 are as follows:

Year Ending December 31,	Amount
2015	$	211
2016 and after		—
Total	$	211

Rent expense for all operating leases charged against earnings amounted to $266 and $242 for the fiscal years 2014 and 2013, respectively.

Employment Contracts - As of December 31, 2014, one executive officer had agreed to enter into an employment agreement with the Company. The agreement was formally executed on March 21, 2013, with an effective date of December 21, 2012. The agreement generally continues until terminated by the employee or the Company, and provides for severance payments under certain circumstances. The agreement includes a covenant against competition with the Company which extends for a period of time after termination for any reason. As of December 31, 2014, if the employee under contract were terminated by the Company without good cause, under these contracts, the Company’s liability would be approximately $150.

Contractual Arrangements - During the normal course of business, the Company may enter into various agreements with third parties to license, acquire, distribute, broadcast, develop and/or promote Properties. The terms of these agreements will vary based on the services and/or Properties included within the agreements, as each of these agreements also have specific provisions relating to rights granted, territory and contractual term.

Contingencies

TCD International, Ltd. - On February 12, 2010, Home Focus Development, Ltd., a British Virgin Islands corporation, (“Home Focus”) filed suit against the Company in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Home Focus alleged that the Company owed Home Focus $1,075 under an Interest Purchase Agreement among the Company, Home Focus and TC Digital entered into on March 2, 2009, pursuant to which the Company acquired a 25% ownership interest in TCD International, Ltd. (“TDI”).

On April 26, 2010, the Company filed an answer and asserted various counterclaims against Home Focus and its owners, in their individual capacities. In its counterclaims, the Company has alleged that Home Focus failed to make its contractually required initial capital contribution of $250 to TDI necessary to acquire the 25% ownership interest in TDI it purported to sell to the Company and also failed to contribute its 50% share of the expenses. The Company has further asserted counterclaims of fraud and misrepresentation.

On May 7, 2014, the Company entered into a settlement agreement with Home Focus, which was approved by the Bankruptcy Court on July 23, 2014. Under the terms of the agreement, the Company was required to pay Home Focus $750, which the Company paid on August 8, 2014.

Lehman Brothers, Inc. Claim - The Company believes that Lehman Brothers, Inc., the securities broker-dealer that purchased auction rate securities on behalf of the Company violated its legal obligations to the Company. As a result, the Company took various measures to obtain appropriate legal relief, including initiating an arbitration on April 3, 2008 against Lehman Brothers, Inc. and the brokers who had serviced the Company’s Lehman account with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority. On September 15, 2008, Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc., the parent company of Lehman Brothers, Inc., filed for bankruptcy. The Company’s arbitration proceeding was stayed by the Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc. bankruptcy. On September 16, 2008, Barclays PLC announced that it had reached an agreement to purchase the assets of Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc.’s North American operations, including substantial assets of Lehman Brothers, Inc. The Lehman-Barclays transaction was approved by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York on September 20, 2008. On September 19, 2008, the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (“SIPC”) filed a proceeding, placing Lehman Brothers, Inc. in liquidation under the Securities Investor Protection Act (“SIPA”). SIPC, pursuant to its authority under SIPA, has acted to facilitate the transfer of Lehman Brothers, Inc.’s customer accounts (including the Company’s accounts) to Barclays, PLC. In late September, 2009, the Company filed a proof of claim against Lehman Brothers, Inc. in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York. The principal amount of the claim was approximately $31,500 plus interest. In addition, the proof of claim requested treble damages. The proof of claim is a general unsecured claim. On October 18, 2011, the Company entered into a settlement agreement and general release with the brokers who had serviced the Company’s account with Lehman Brothers, Inc. in exchange for a payment to the Company of approximately $489. On May 5, 2014, the Company entered into a stipulation with the Trustee for the liquidation of Lehman Brothers, Inc., regarding its proof of claim. As part of the stipulation the Company will have an allowed, general unsecured creditor claim against the general estate of Lehman Brothers, Inc. of $3,653, which represents the Company’s final settlement of all claims against Lehman Brothers, Inc.

On May 9, 2014, the Company sold its $3,653 general unsecured creditor claim against the Lehman Brothers, Inc. estate to a third party for $1,607.

Cornerstone Patent Technologies, LLC – On April 25, 2011, Cornerstone Patent Technologies, LLC (“Cornerstone”) filed proof of claim No. 20 (the “Cornerstone Claim”) in the Bankruptcy Court against the Debtors in the Bankruptcy Cases in the amount of $3,300. Other than filing the Cornerstone Claim, Cornerstone has not commenced litigation against the Debtors. The Cornerstone Claim alleges (i) breach of a Patent License Agreement dated September 10, 2007 by non-Debtors TC Digital and TC Websites; (ii) breach of Patent Purchase Agreement dated by September 7, 2007, by 4Kids Technology for failing to notify Cornerstone of alleged wrongdoing by TC Digital and TC Websites; (iii) unfair competition; (iv) tortious interference with contract; (v) unjust enrichment; and (vi) piercing the corporate veil. The Company disputes the Cornerstone Claim in its entirety. On November 12, 2012, the Company filed a motion with the Bankruptcy Court to estimate the Cornerstone Claim at $0 or in the alternative disallow the claim. On December 5, 2012, the Bankruptcy Court entered an agreed order between the Company and Cornerstone providing that on the effective date of the Plan, the Debtors would establish a disputed claims reserve on account of the Cornerstone Claim in the amount of $228, without prejudice to (i) Cornerstone’s rights to pursue an allowed claim or judgment against the Debtors in an amount greater than the reserve, with such allowed claim or judgment to be paid pursuant to the Plan and (ii) the Debtors’ rights to defend, contest or otherwise oppose on any grounds, the Cornerstone Claim or any other claims or litigation asserted by or on behalf of Cornerstone or any other party. On August 29, 2013, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order disallowing and expunging the Cornerstone Claim. As a result, a gain of $443 from the reversal of a liability was recognized during the year ended December 31, 2013 in the income from discontinued operations.

The Bankruptcy Cases – The Bankruptcy Cases were initially filed by the Debtors with the Bankruptcy Court on April 6, 2011. On October 5, 2012, the Company filed the Plan and Disclosure Statement. On October 29, 2012, the Debtors filed an amended version of the Plan and Disclosure Statement. On October 31, 2012, the Bankruptcy Court entered a solicitation procedures order permitting the Debtors to send the Plan and Disclosure Statement to the parties entitled to vote on the Plan. On December 13, 2012, the Bankruptcy Court held a confirmation hearing with respect to the Plan. After a hearing and consideration by the Bankruptcy Court of the provisions of the Plan, including consideration of support for the Plan by a vote of approximately 99.93% of shareholders who voted their shares, and there being only one objector to the Plan, the Bankruptcy Court issued an order confirming the Plan. The Plan became effective on December 21, 2012.

On the effective date of the Plan, the Company commenced paying creditors holding undisputed, allowed claims the full amount of such allowed claims. The Company and its counsel have also negotiated various settlement agreements with creditors holding disputed claims. As of December 31, 2014, the Company has paid all allowed claims and, on May 7, 2014, the Company entered into a settlement agreement with the remaining disputed claimant which requires final Bankruptcy Court approval. On July 23, 2014, the Bankruptcy Court approved the settlement agreement with the remaining claimant and issued a final decree closing the Chapter 11 case of the Company.

The Company, from time to time, is involved in litigation, contract disputes and claims arising in the ordinary course of its business. The Company does not believe that it is currently subject to any litigation or claims that will, individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position or the results of its operations or cash flows.