With what has OFFICIALLY come to light through HTC's revalatory filing, PTSC's complaints, and CJ's and others' declarations, it begs the following question IMO.

Were the One-Time License Fee structured license sales versus an ongoing royalty strugured license which seemingly could be much more beneficial to PTSC, simply a mechanism by TPL to enhance their ability to compromise MMP fees in relation to other portfolio's license fees? Was it necessary to keep the license structures similar for the multi-portofolios licensees in order to get the deals done on the other portfolios?

Considering Leckrone's age, was he pushing for the one-time license fees so he could get all the money now for his own benefit, versus an ongoing predictable revenue stream that would likely have been more to PTSC's benefit?

Did PTSC ever consider pushing for ongoing royalties, in lieu of one-off fees? How would that have affected TPL's ability to charge the expenses they did considering they would likely have a small upfront payment from buyers with which to have PDS use to reimburse. Was their a conscious decision made by TPL to get as large an upfront payment so that they could argue for as large a reimbursement of expenses, and all the other additional "lobbying" and other fees they've collected from PDS off the top?

Did PTSC's BOD ever consider this? Do they have the business acumen to even understand it?