So Rossi's quasi-scam is to jerk around a bunch of scientists with phony reactors so as to throw off his competitors?
harry On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: > > From: Randy Wuller > > So for example, let’s say Rossi knew that by setting up the > constraints associated with testing the ash, (1% from stuff that fell out), > everyone would be misled as to what was actually happening. That’s more > appropriately described as protecting your IP. > > Randy - I never said anything about a crime. Why are you? None of the TV > scams I mentioned were prosecuted as a crime, as far as I know. If > dishonesty was a crime, we would have to lock up half of the politicians in > DC. > > Make that: more than half. And also - aren’t you assuming that he is not > misleading his funder, as well? > > Would your opinion change if you found out that his royalty agreement was a > long-term deal structured around performance milestones? > > I have no idea what his deal consists of, but I doubt if he can walk away > with a large sum without some kind of verification that the device actually > works. It is normal business practice with many inventions that a large > portion of the total royalty payment will in escrow pending milestones > and/or will be delayed until cash-flow starts, meaning that a commercial > product emerges. > > Jones > >
