Suggesting that it is due to his inability to get a patent points again to why he should have done a proper black box demo in January - then he could have quickly signed up a large expert technology development partner that could have quickly resolved all of his IP ownership problems. The system is not lacking in patentablity, just knowledge of how to do it effectively, resources to do it comprehensively, and money/political connections to make it stick.
On 8 November 2011 14:45, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson < [email protected]> wrote: > From Robert Lynn > > > The problem is that it is easy to come up with fraudulent methods > > that could have delivered the observed demo results. Add to > > which Rossi has had no end of opportunities to remove all doubt, > > at no extra cost in effort or materials, and without danger of > > loss of IP, but has chosen not to for reasons that I (and others) > > are unable to guess. This leads to the two hotly contested options: > > That's not necessarily true at all. There may be a very practical > reason as to why Rossi has behaved in such an unscientifically > verifiable way that naturally leads many to seriously doubt his > results: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg54430.html > > Regards > Steven Vincent Johnson > www.OrionWorks.com > www.zazzle.com/orionworks > >
