After being absent for the last few days I read with interest Brian s detailed message (see attached), some responses etc etc....

A contract question occurred to me that may be relevant but as I am not a lawyer I would appreciate a response from Ron or Brian or thoughts from Laurie and others.

I was taught eons ago that for a contract to be valid and binding a primary tenet was that there be EQUAL CONSIDERATION given to both sides of the agreement. In addition that a party or parties cannot be part of a binding and legal contract if one or more of the contractual parties is found to be functioning in a detriment to other contractual parties in a DETRIMENTAL MANNER that is not in accordance TO THE ASSURANCE'S MADE when entering into the contract and when those assurances can be found within the body of the contract.

It is my lay opinion that CJ signed this contract without IMO there being equal consideration given to PTSC (us) as it would appear that by it's very wording the agreement allows for TPL to bail at any time for any reason while Patriot is not allowed such a clause. There are other items I could point out that seem to be unreasonable for PTSC but I will leave that for others. Yes, I know that Carl is an attorney(?) and the Board voted to accept Alliacense as the PDS rep. but there appears to me that there are underlying reasons besides ignorance (blackmail?) that caused this to happen. However, if the contract does not have equal consideration to both parties and this one surely does not seem to benefit PTSC (PDS) at all is this contract really valid? It would seem to me that it would be worth a chalenge at the very least.

Alliacense, made certain assurances (I gather) of performing and obtaining licenses at a more rapid and larger rater then previously accomplished and it would seem that this is the reason that they were granted such a large % of revenue. Previous agreements and our law suit was cancelled due to these assurances. Yet once again it would seem to me that BASED on these ASSURANCES we accepted a contract with Alliacense to our DETRIMENT.

If so would this not be another reason to seek to declare this contract null and void? If so somehow IMO we must make it clear to the sitting Board of PTSC that either they act in our best interest and seek to nullify the PDS/Alliacense contract and we strongly support the BK committee and the BK Judge in throwing "The BUM" out of TPL and out of our Lives.

IMO

Marc