If IH can somehow use the IP of Rossi but get out of the licence agreement with Rossi, they will save one $billion. This may explain the motivation in the actions of IH. This is just a theory of the case.
On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 6:30 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > Their motivation makes sense if they never intended to take the results of > the one year test seriously. They did not care what the EVR did, they had > Rossi's IP in hand that they could transfer to their own products and that > of their other EOMs. > > On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 5:22 PM, Craig Haynie <cchayniepub...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> >> >> On 05/13/2016 04:20 PM, Axil Axil wrote: >> >> What confuses the analysis of the motives of IH is that IH patented the >> Lugano device, as Rossi's IP. This indicated that IH knew that Rossi's IP >> worked and gave Rossi credit for it in a patent application, I cannot >> figure out their motive here??? It could b that their was a management >> disconnect where the "plan" was not understood by all of the employees of >> IH. >> >> The other thing that confuses me, is that in the contract they signed >> with Rossi, they didn't have a clause which allowed them to independently >> evaluate the device; nor did it allow them to certify, or reject, the >> evaluation of the EVR; and they agreed to Rossi's guy, Penon. Why? >> >> It doesn't make sense to me. It's not something that their lawyers should >> have allowed; nor something I would have agreed to, if I was Darden, unless >> I was certain of the outcome. >> >> Craig >> >> >
