Reading the license agreement, it looks to me like IH doesn't get the
option to bail if they don't agree with the result of the 350 day test.
As I read it, it looks like their only say in completing this deal,
occurred when they agreed with Rossi who would do the independent
evaluation. Once that party was chosen, then it looks like they have to
pay up if the report is positive, and meets the required specifications.
There doesn't appear to be an option to decline, at this point.
Craig
On 04/10/2016 10:30 AM, Eric Walker wrote:
On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 3:31 AM, Teslaalset
<robbiehobbiesh...@gmail.com <mailto:robbiehobbiesh...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Rossi points out that the 'old' conditions in the agreement are
still met (implemented with hotcat methods) and that IH therefore
should fulfil the agreed payment. For IH this hotcat knowledge
transfer is not profitable anymore now Rossi has his x-cat
technology in his pocket.
An idea that occurred to me, perhaps related to this, is that (a)
Rossi has been approached by new investors but is currently bound by
agreements with IH, and (b) IH are stalling on making good on their
side of the deal, because they don't think the testing has been
rigorous. How this scenario plays out is that Rossi sees himself as
in a position of strength, so as soon as IH failed to pay, he
terminated the agreement and launched the suit in order to recover
damages, so that he could proceed unhindered with the new venture.
Eric
