Considering the disaster that the Apple license represents for PTSC, and the overall MMP licensing effort, and the questionable overall amount as well as the amount ultimately recognized as allocated to the MMP, I wonder what portion of the overall fee TPL/Alliacence got for securing the actual license?

Did they take the 15% off the top that was allowed through the CommAg? If so, did that 15% apply only to the portion that was allocated to the MMP?

Did they get 15% of the overall fee citing the CommAg? If so, how can PTSC not fight that to the end and using that justification for total allocation to the MMP?

Was there some kind of tiered license fee off the top based on the individual portfolio allocation per the individual commercialization agreements for each portfolio?

IMO, the entire $958K or whatever they claim was allocated to MMP should have gone to PTSC, and the fact that PTSC settled this case out of court just is inconceivable, when you take into account the tremendous damage that it had done to both PTSC and the MMP licensing effort.

That PTSC is doing so little to challenge TPL in BK proceedings, or as some here have comically argued, they are "leading from behind", it's infuriating and outrageously irresponsible of them, IMO.

When you think about the total chaos that commingling creates, I still shake my head at the incredible assertion that a certain poster made, wher he construed the "resolution" by PDS about the prohibition of commingling to rather be a REQUIREMENT that TPL commingle their MMP licensing efforts with any of the efforts for their other portfolios.

PTSC BOD/Management....WHERE IS YOUR FIDUCIARY ACTION AND RESPOSIBILITY TOWARD YOUR SHAREHOLDERS?!!?!?!?