I think an expanded explanation might be worthwhile,...

I think an expanded explanation might be worthwhile, @coppernoob.

RAP does not own the foundation IP (patents) but it does own the licence to use that IP, and also owns any products it has developed from it.

Whilst in that position it is able to sub-licence to others to develop other products based on the IP. RAP has done this with the licence granted to Pfizer to jointly develop a Covid-19 screening tool.

If RAP were to be bought out (say by Pfizer) then ownership of the licence would transfer to the purchaser. UniQld would still retain ownership of the IP but the purchaser would own the developed products and would have the right to then control how the licence is used (or not used) from that point on.

As you point out the best outcome that provides some guarantee that the Abeyratne work will developed to its potential would be for ResApp to retain control of the licence and how it is used, rather than transfer that control to Pfizer by selling the Company.

Independent of who owns the licence, as IP owner UniQld would retain the right to receive royalty payments as a percentage of revenues collected, as defined by the licence agreement.