Seems like alot of people here think TPL is the bad guy and confused as to what TPL and PTSC relationship is regarding the licensing.....

Any new IPs that PTSC brings to the market will almost certainity have 0% ownership with TPL. The exception to the rule was that a few years ago TPL claimed ownership of same MMP patent tht PTSC claimed as their own. They settled on 50% ownership for each party and TPL would handle all licensing & marketing of the patent. Less than 2 years later, 45 companies and 250 million dollars later..... TPL has made very good on their licensing actions. *** Take aside what happened with the J3 as we dont know all the background issues. Did TPL cave in, did PTSC cave in, or is there more to story?..So im not touching that part of the debate..

However, aside from the MMP.... PTSC does and will have future IP products which they will allow TPL to license for them. ( The relationship as a manufactor using a distributor to gain mass entrance into a market). This does not mean that TPL owns that IP.. they will not control the pricing....they will receive a commision or percentage of the sales... but nowhere near the 50% like they do as an owner of the MMP.

http://www.bizsandiego.com/bizbuz-de...

RG said himself - " We have identified several patent portfolios to expand our MMP™ portfolio licensing efforts through TPL, our exclusive licensing partner. These IP portfolios involve microcontroller, power management, embedded memory and mobile networking IP."

Just because PTSC is using TP for the licensing of other IP products does not mean that TPL will merger with PTSC. Just means that because of an existing relationship and success of the licensing efforts of the MMP, PTSC made a decision to allow TPL to go ahead and license other products. PTSC can probably license to customers directly on the new products... while TPL hits other accounts. Just like you can buy directly from the manufactor or buy from their authorized dealers/distributors.