Follow me here....

PTSC, PDS, TPL and Alliacense are involved in new agreements that warrant PTSC, the only public company of the four, to feel obliged to file an 8-K, even though it has the most important (to common shareholders) information held out of sight.

This was apparently done without the third and independent member of PDS being identified or even engaged.

The idea of PDS was that it has a "board" of 3, one PTSC, one TPL and one independent - for good reason.

Are these new agreements even legal if PDS is not conforming to its legal constitution?

I suppose, however, that as with the PTSC board the weaker third has no effect - i.e. even if the independent member of PDS were there, CJ and DL would just automatically be in the majority anyway. Except perhaps a truly independent member might say "That's not legal" and then the other two are at risk of being reported by an actual witness to any chicanery.

How are agreements which limit the rights of PTSC, now and in future, in any way, shape or form in the interests of PTSC shareholders?