On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
> > People such as Patterson and Rossi failed deliberately. They went out of > their way to avoid convincing the public, because that is their market > strategy. Patterson told me so. Rossi has not told me that, but it is the > only explanation I can imagine for his "no tests!" policy. I mean the fact > that he refused to let me and many others spend a few minutes confirming his > claims with proper instruments. We offered; he said no. Emphatically no. > There has to be a reason. Since he did allow other highly qualified to > people to verify the effect independently, but only under NDAs, I assume he > doe not want people to know for sure his claims are true. That is not an > unusual business strategy. The law recogonizes that private interests must be balanced against public interests so under some circumstances a party to a contract may have the right to break a contract. I wonder if the law allows NDAs to be broken if the NDA is used to conceal lies. Harry
