Quoted from http://www.iep.utm.edu/solipsis/:
One might even say, solipsism is necessarily foundationless, for to make an appeal to logical rules or empirical evidence the solipsist would implicitly have to affirm the very thing that he purportedly refuses to believe: the reality of intersubjectively valid criteria and a public, extra-mental world.
I've had the pleasure of speaking with Dr. Thornton (the author of the article on the IEP) rather extensively. He is a truly intelligent man, and his views and defense of the PLA seem well founded and thorough.
I suppose the real question at hand is, does Wittgenstein's argument succeed in the way Dr. Thornton says it does?
It seems to me any weak point of the PLA isn't enough to derail it, and that logically it's well founded for the most part. The pyrrhonian view seems to clearly be something Wittgenstein was not arguing for, as does the Kripkean view of the PLA, so the answer to the above would preclude those views.