Over the years the PTSC BOD has, in the interests of the company and shareholders, negotiated agreements whereby

(a) shareholders (and potential shareholders) are denied knowledge of key business performance indicators,

(b) in addition to PDS costs, PTSC is now directly funding legal costs for MMP (at least to some time after Markman) and the changes in the key TPL agreement are kept secret and

(c) key business performance indicators are known only to a select few, including but not limited to PTSC Board members, PDS Board members, TPL, Alliacense, Leckrone and their relevant partners.

(d) an entity named "PDS" was created to oversee and manage MMP license revenues and distributions, with three members - one from PTSC, one from TPL and one "independent" the latter being the only one to be paid by PDS.

Questions:

(a) Why did PTSC not take the recent "TPL settlement" opportunity to negotiate with TPL the ability to better inform shareholders and potential shareholders of progress and prospects for MMP?

(b) Is TPL contributing an equal amount to these fees as PTSC? If not, why not?

(c) Why are the majority of those people not considered "insiders" for SEC purposes, given that they are intimately aware of all prospects, negotiations and timing related to MMP revenues and essentially control the PTSC income flow?

(d) Why is PDS operating in violation of its charter which reportedly requires an "independent" member? Why is PTSC paying fees to Mr. Johnson for his participation in PDS, especially when he condones the lack of such "independent" oversight? How many meetings of PDS have occurred without the presence of the "independent" member and what decisions were made in those meetings?