First off, I suggest you follow the links and read a lot of the exhibits. Lots of good info in there confirming a lot of what has been posted here over the years.

Secondly, Laurie's not saying that PTSC is leaglly liable for the 3.5% of their share, at least not yet. What she's saying is that the Court has ruled that Brown is entitled to 3.5% of the GROSS license fee that the MMP brings in for licenses that TPL is listed as the sole licensor on. Based on the original CommAg, that essentially covers all of the MMP licenses signed prior to the revised CommAg from last year, with the exception of the AMD license which was signed only by Patriot, some or all of the J3 licenses, since Patriot as a fellow litigator and thus party to the settlements was listed as well as TPL, and the Apple license (Yes THAT Apple for those who doubted all those posts I and others offered).

It's pretty clear now why the CommAg was revised last year and PDS was put as the licensing agent. If you read the documents from the Brown case, you'll realize it is just a mechanism designed to protect TPL through the bankruptcy and from future Brown or others' claims, and NOT some result of PTSC BOD flexing its muscles or asserting control on the MMP and TPL as some postulated. It was simply rearranging the deck chairs to sheild TPL.

Since it's been ruled that TPL must pay Brown 3.5% of the gross proceeds, and since they'll likely fail in getting that ruling overturned, they'll emerge from the proceedings with a court ruling that would then arm them with a court ordered argument that the 3.5% should come off the top before the other expenses, and thus leave less leftover for PTSC and TPL to split.

Based on the history of the players involved, I have not a doubt that that will be TPL's next play. At that point, PTSC will be in a position where they either have to try to fight that approach from TPL, or acquiesce to it in the spirit of "Peace" and moving forward.

I'll remind you of a post you made about my objections to PTSC doing exactly this same thing acquiescing to paying half of the money due Moore, when they had not liability for it, or had never indicated such in filings prior to it happening. Your argument then was that it was a small price to pay for "peace". Amazing, isn't it?