The judge in the Brown V TPL case made the following summary of his Statement of Deciscion:

http://www.scefiling.org/filingdocs/11049/65251/endorse_102619_ReplyxtoxOppositionxtoxJNOVx7x25x13.pdf

"I determined that the Assignment Agreement, which is Exhibit 2 in this trial, gave the Browns 3.5% of the gross (not net) proceeds received by T.P.L. or anyone directed to receive any licensing moneys. This means that any license showing T.P.L. as the sole licensor, regardless of where, how, or to whom payments are made, is subject to the application of the Browns' percentage; in other words, it is of no consequence that payments are made to P.D.S. The Browns are still entitled to 3.5% before any expeneses are deducted by P.D.S. or anyone else."

Prior to the recently revised CommAg, TPL was typically the sole licensor in title. However, that was not true for the Intel license, the AMD license, the J3 Licenses, or the Apple License, and thus all of those were NOT subjected to 3.5% on total MMP GROSS, but on TPL's gross only. The revisions to the CommAg now make PDS the licensor from what has been communicated, so it stands to reason that the 3.5% would be factored only on the portion that TPL grosses from each license.

Whether TPL comes back to PTSC and tries to get them to pay for half or even some of that remains to be seen, but it's not the way the ruling was defined by the judge.