the reciever has the "not so fast" card that he can and i believe will play.
put yourself in his shoes, imagine perfect moral integrety in paying yourself for making the most for shareholders, would you simply pay the shareholders a ton of money auction off the patent and then pray for laster to find another calypso?
NO, no way, you would realize that w/ a ton of money comes a huge responsibility to step up and take command and control an opportunity that is capible of sustaining itself in the greatest possible way--not to do so would be immoral and fully without integrety
the reciever's obligation to both the court and investors is exponentially depandent on how much money the patent is worth, its the reciever's moral obligation to EARN as much money as he is morally entitled to. If he chooses to work less to exit quickly and make little money when he could do better for both himself and investors he must not do so for any reason.
as far as the directors, he has a moral obligation to get the best directors he can afford.
each significant incremental increase in the proven value of the patent brings with it additional processes and controls that should be adhered to by the reciever--to act in any other way, that is to not use money to insure and explore in accordance with high level corporate business principles is to act wholly with out integrety.
a patent that proves that its the best that can be brings with it an avalanche of things that should be done a certain right-way. Its only logical that when forced to consider this myriad of possibliities that the all pervasive and inevatible truth is to re-instate the company if the best that the patent brings is billions from tmobile.
AI
