More thoughts....

First, to make my interpretation perfectly clear, the resolutions do not restrict TPL "side deals" for other patent portfolios they represent, but practically REQUIRES any other portfolio licensing to be in the form of side deals packaged/bundled with an MMP license.

Now, moving on, it is my opinion that resolutions basically revolve around compromise and CYA for Lecky.

My understanding is that the PDS Management Committee is made up of Johnson (PTSC), poppa Lecky, and an unnamed TPL rep, him/her being the single hold out to approving the resolutions. In other words, Lecky (and Johnson) approved the resolutions.

The CYA for Lecky is that, with PTSC now being in a position to voice approval or objection to the terms of future licensing, he avoids the possibility of allegations by PTSC that TPL/Alliacense is not providing the required "best effort" in negotiating future licenses. And I suspect that this adjustment to the license approval process may provide PTSC (Johnson) with visibility as to the terms of the licenses of other patent portfolios bundled with the MMP, thus providing some assurance the PTSC/MMP is getting a proporationately proper "good deal".

The compromise (recognizing things stated in my prior post) is that while licensing the MMP must be the primary focus of TPL/Alliacense, they are still permitted to license the other portfolios they represent, allowing them to live up to the MAs with the other patent portfolio owners. However, those other patent portfolio owners "swallow" any independence in licensing activity, since a license for their portfolio must henceforth be bundled with a MMP license.

While this PR addresses issues having to do with whether certain info will be sealed by the court, I strongly suspect that the real issue at hand here is the TPL failure to demonstrate "acquiescence" to the resolution properly approved by the committee. In other words, IMO, it appears that Lecky may be having second thoughts about these properly adopted resolutions. And it may be that Lecky's second thoughts are founded in "push back" by the owners of other patent portfolios TPL/Alliacense represents who have essentially lost any independence in future licensing, since a license for their portfolio must be bundled with an MMP license.

JMHOs,

SGE