Jed, I am not going over all your statements. Your statements indicate that you have little understanding about business. It is seldom black and white. Yes, there is a standard of conduct between competitors in any industry, so in the community of investment companies. Your hang up on technical details may or may not be of any impact. It is the famous trees that block the view of the forest. That people leak information is part of the game. You may , or may not be a conduit for such leaked information. As your information is so limited, I have suggested you should not make so absolute sure judgment about the situation. I still think that is the case.
As it comes to if Rossi's claims are real or not. I do not know but much of his behavior tells me he is a real guy and as most inventors / entrepreneurs hard to deal with. They are by nature hardnosed and outside ghe box. On May 19, 2016 09:58, "Jed Rothwell" <[email protected]> wrote: Peter Gluck <[email protected]> wrote: too much psychology...IH admits paying 11 million was a mistake > specifically for NOT paying the due 89 millions. A simple gambit. > That's absurd. Why would they not pay if the technology works? They will be plagued with lawsuits. If they try to commercialize it, everyone will see they stole it, and they will then lose a much larger lawsuit. What you are suggesting makes no business sense. There is no way they can avoid paying $89 million if the technology works and they want to use it for any purpose. Even if they "steal" it and give it to Brillouin Energy, that does not get them anywhere. People will find out Brillouin is using it, and Brillouin will have to pay a license fee the same as anyone else. - Jed
