PTSC is wholly dependent upon on TPL and Alliacense to license the MMP portofolio, which is almost entirely PTSC's sole income driver and apparently necessary for PTSC to remain viable and solvent. As a result of the recent lawsuit between TPL and PTSC, we know that TPL and Alliacense had more control and advance knowledge of information regarding MMP infringing parties, damage amounts, negotiations status, and Licensing fees than did the BOD Leadership at PTSC. Rightfully, traditionally, the Leadership at PTSC are deemed to be "Insiders" for PTSC stock Trading and Reporting due to the obvious and typical reasons of advance knowledge of financial impacting activities to our company.

Why is TPL treated any different than the BOD and Executive Insiders at PTSC ? Is TPL an Insider to PTSC ? What about ALLIACENSE ? The PDS Independent Manager ? Aren't they all Insiders for the same advance knowledge reasons PTSC's leadership are ? Shouldn't they be ? By virtue of this continuous and contractual relationship, TPL and their team are responsible for the licensing and prosecution efforts of the MMP portfolio; and as those efforts go, so goes the prospects of revenues/income for PDS, and then the one half share to PTSC; and thus the resulting impact on PTSC's Profit or Loss and impacted stock value. Afterall, it is PTSC who reminds us in their SEC filings "...we are wholly dependent on TPL to secure licensing revenues with respect to our microprocessor portfolio, which revenues have represented substantially all of our income since June 2005".

How can we be "wholly dependent on TPL to secure revenues which represent substantially all of our income", and them not have inside information ???? It's just not believeable. I can't imagine a stronger case being made for an outsider being an "Insider". Virtually nothing happens regarding MMP licensing, PTO and prosecution activities that TPL doesn't determine or authorize.

1. Who is an "INSIDER" ? In addition to company Officers, Directors and 10% owners, "Insiders" include those who have "temporary" or "constructive" access to "material" "nonpublic" information on a company. That includes anyone outside of the firm.



2. What is "MATERIAL" information? There is no statutory definition of what type of information is “material.” However, a common guideline is whether there is a substantial likelihood that a reasonable investor would consider the information to be important in deciding whether to purchase or sell a security.



3. What is "NONPUBLIC" information? In general, information is “nonpublic” until it is publicly disseminated, which can occur by the issuance of a press release, disclosure in a document filed with the SEC, or through a public webcast

From Yahoo Finance Message Board Nov 16, 2011