I asked you if you expected those of us that understand that PDS is controlled by Dan Leckrone whether we should be jumping up and down with joy? What is it about PDS, who I believe is sucking the life and money out of PTSC, that excites you so much that you want to insure the current bod gets credit for its' creation? I'm all ears

Without PDS there would be two separate and distinct licensing efforts, TPL with all the reverse-engineered materials, and PTSC with.... what?

No matter what you believe, please show me verifiable facts as to the harm that PDS is causing PTSC.

Bringing togther both the licensing effort and defense of the patents under one roof has, in my belief, not only removed the doubt about from whom to license (any owner can license a patent without the authority of other owner/s) and reduced costs, no matter what one believes about the partners.

If TPL and PTSC were individually chasing the same prospective licensee, who do you think would get the fee?

Now go back pre PDS, how would PTSC have financed any challenges to the patents' validity?

I'm not asking for unbridled joy at the situation but acknowledgement that given all the circumstances it was the right way forward - a pragmatic perspective.

.

.

.

Be well