June 24, 2009

Mark G. Johnson
Winstead P.C.
5400 Renaissance Tower
1201 Elm Street
Dallas, TX 75270

Dear Mr. Johnson:

	I am in receipt of your June 22, 2009 letter denying the request by
Pinnacle Fund, LLLP ("Pinnacle") to inspect corporate records of Forgent
Networks, Inc. (the "Company") pursuant to Section 220 of the Delaware General
Corporation Law.

   	Your letter inadequately claims that Pinnacle failed to state a proper
purpose to receive the requested information in its June 15, 2009 letter to the
Company.  If the letter was unclear, Pinnacle's purpose is to communicate the
requested information to the Company's stockholders in connection with
Pinnacle's proxy solicitation for the Company's upcoming annual meeting.  As
you know, the information Pinnacle requested would confirm or rebut facts that
stockholders would find very material in deciding how to vote at the annual
meeting.

	Delaware courts have consistently supported open and informed elections
and have held that seeking information for the purpose of communicating with
shareholders is a permissible purpose.  See Credit Bureau Reports, Inc. v.
Credit Bureau of St. Paul, Inc., 290 A.2d 691 (Del. 1972) and Food and Allied
Service Trades Dept., AFL-CIO v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 18 Del. J. Corp. L. 651
(Del.Ch. 1992).  As the Credit Bureau Reports court clearly stated, "under
Section 220, the desire to solicit proxies for a slate of directors in
opposition to management is a purpose reasonably related to the stockholder's
interest as a stockholder."

	We urge the Company to reconsider its denial of Pinnacle's request.  It
appears that the Company's refusal to provide the information requested is
motivated by the belief that the requested information would cast management in
an unfavorable light.  If management has nothing to hide, the Company may
demonstrate this by delivering the information that Pinnacle has requested.

	If the Company has an appropriate and compelling reason to keep
specific elements of the requested information confidential, Pinnacle is
willing to discuss these concerns.  However, a general denial of access to all
information is not acceptable.

Sincerely,



Peter J. Tennyson
of PAUL, HASTINGS, JANOFSKY & WALKER LLP