You said in one of your mean spirited posts that you are trying to help me. You and I both know you are being disingenuous. You have some issue with me and I’m not sure what it is, so maybe you will be kind enough to tell me.

I am just one person who drove two hours to the Santa Clara court to review documents in the PTSC vs TPL case. For hours, I reviewed those docs as well as docs from the Brown and Marcoux cases. I am just one person who happened to see that Apple was not redacted in many of the documents. It was a couple- three years ago and my personal notes were more focused on the reasons why we filed suit as stated in the first amended complaint. I did share my notes on Agoracom.

Of less importance to me is whether the dollar amounts everyone is fired up about were initial negotiation amounts, or end negotiation amounts. Of more importance is the fact that Patriot accused Dan Leckrone of commingling licenses, fraud, breach of contract, etc. Patriot also said that TPL was virtually insolvent.

Furthermore, from the initial ComAG

ARTICLE VI

TERMINATION

c) TPL enters into a reorganization under Chapter 11 of the

United States Bankruptcy Code, and TPL ceases to be a debtor in possession

during the pendency of such bankruptcy proceeding

To my knowledge, TPL filed chapter 11 as a debtor in possession. I do not know by what means one ceases to be a debtor in possession nor do I know if this BK clause was removed from the new agreements. If it is still a reason for termination and our directors have evidence, knowledge, and/or power to force TPL to cease being a debtor in possession and they haven’t moved on this, wouldn’t you say this is a breach of fiduciary responsibility?

Additionally, Alliacense now has an agreement whereby they are the only ones that can cancel this agreement for cause or no cause. How is this in Patriot’s best interest?

FWIW, I don’t know of any simian that can read court documents, let alone understand them. Perhaps you move in different circles. J