if they get their way and replace DL with a Trustee

Assuming DL and Carl would choose the wisest decision considering the time constraints we're under in the first place; this will soon be a moot issue imo.

The Creditor's Committee has different interests than does PTSC or TPL. They may not get Alliasence removed from their Licensing involvement contract, but as a full PDS BOD member and having input to the selection of third member, they will now be a major influence in running the MMP infringment prosecution strategy show.

They will likely get the Trustee appointed to PDS, but the focus of the Creditors will be to get as much money in as quickly as possible to extinguish their debts. They're worried about the patents running out too, so will want to front load as many licenses as possible. This is not in the Patent owner's best interests, because now the balancing will tip to expediency over strategy and potential licensing valuations.

This is the reason why many are so frustrated and dismayed over PTSC's apparent absence to independently persuade, influence, and appeal to the BK Court as Co-Owners of the Patents with unique and differing interests far exceeding those of "common" creditors.