Lennart, I said that with more confidence than is warranted. I am not a lawyer, so I do not know how to interpret a license agreement, how the court will interpret this particular agreement, or what IH and Rossi should have put in it with the benefit of hindsight. But I suggest to anyone who is interested in the question of what improvements to the E-Cat technology are covered by the agreement to read through it for these details, as perhaps you have done. One will see that the language is very broad. Perhaps Daniel is correct that the QuarkX would not be covered by it; presumably in that case the QuarkX is not a derivative work.
One might speculate that if Rossi had anything at all he might have felt very uncomfortable with the broad scope of the agreement, being acquainted with his personality and temperament. Eric On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 8:02 PM, Lennart Thornros <lenn...@thornros.com> wrote: > Eric , I agree with your evaluation of the contract. However, there is one > of the issues I do not understand about IH's handling. Why did they not > specify the details of how the transfer should be done. I would in their > shoes. Maybe I just have been around for too long:) > IMHO that is a major flaw in this agreement. If they do not pick up the > detailss then who to blaim.??? > > Best Regards , > Lennart Thornros > > > lenn...@thornros.com > +1 916 436 1899 > > Whatever you vividly imagine, ardently desire, sincerely believe and > enthusiastically act upon, must inevitably come to pass. (PJM) > > > On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 4:32 PM, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> The Hot Cat is a different invention and its operation was not covered in >>> the IP transferred by the IP of the agreement IMHO. >>> >> >> I read the license agreement quite differently. It had language >> pertaining to all future improvements. The language sounded like it >> readily covered the HotCat, and indeed the E-Cat X. The contract also >> stipulated that Rossi help out with transferring any knowledge required to >> make use of his technology. I can look it up the relevant sections if they >> would be interesting. Whatever ways that IH may have been in breach of the >> license agreement, Rossi was assuredly in breach in this specific regard. >> >> With regard to the PHOSITAs, these will apply to any and all patent >> applications filed by Rossi. >> >> Eric >> >> >
