Andrea Rossi Responds to IH Statement

They just keep coming...

Andrea Rossi
April 7, 2016 at 9:09 PM

Hank Mills:
In the press release of [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] they write that ” for three years they tried to replicate the Rossi effect, with no avail”: very good, but during those three years [lexicon]Industrial Heat[/lexicon] collected about 60 million dollars from Woodford, more millions from other sources, exclusively based on my E-Cats technology. This before making shopping to buy other patents. Now, the cases are two: either they are lying when they say they didn’t replicate, or they made a fraud collecting 60 millions from Woodford, more from others, not to mention Cherokee fund. You had to see Tom Darden and JT Vaughn dance like ballet etoiles around the investors, showing them the E-Cats, and telling them that the E-Cats had been built by them! “Stellar” coherently Darden, in his role of etoile, repeated to the enchanted attandees, ready to spend 50 millions. Now, that my bill arrived, the E-Cat had not been replicated , they say. For three years.
Again, I am just answering to a press release of [lexicon]IH[/lexicon].
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Their business models are based on IP...

What Rossi says is sort of true, but twisted and he does not have a leg to stand on.

[lexicon]IH[/lexicon]'s confidence comes from repeated tests either conducted by Rossi, or conducted by others using methodology approved by Rossi, that appeared to give strong positive results. They, like many people here, could not believe it was possible for those tests to be incorrect.

Where [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] were incautious perhaps is in seeking investment from others on the basis of this evidence before they had checked that Rossi's reactors worked in their own test setups. A lack of rigorous testing. To be fair, it takes time, and they have not had control of the 24 hour test reactor for so very long.

What Rossi leaves out is that he was contractually bound to help them get his (and their) reactors to work. If they cannot do this, with his help, his IP is no good to anyone else. Of course they could not do this because the reactors never worked and it was only Rossi's tests that showed them working (the Lugano bad calorimetry was from the Swedes but likely influenced by Rossi - certainly only possible because of Rossi's/[lexicon]IH[/lexicon]'s decision to give them an unpainted alumina reactor when the previous one had been painted black).

[lexicon]IH[/lexicon] will no doubt say this. And Rossi will be unable to demonstrate a working reactor that is externally tested. But, even if he could do that, I think [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] would win legally since it will be clear that Rossi did not deliver as promised working IP and anyway the $89M is a license payment and not paying it incurs no penalty other than loss of a worthless license.

[lexicon]IH[/lexicon] may have trouble with cross investors. But those investors were as gullible as [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] and in these matters it is always caveat emptor.

Quote

Well, someone's name had to be in the frame. The end-user insisted on anonymity so a shadow company was created. But I have seen (wish I could remember where) an aerial view of a large ceramics plant with just two containers parked together round the back, one in a distinctive shade of Rossi Rosso and another in bright mid-blue. As for the reality of the customer, I was never invited to visit, but I know people (technical people) who were. Seems unlikely that they would go there and see nothing.

That is possible, but irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. In any case if the tests are done in this manner no customer will come and validate positive results from an electricity bill, nor trumpet negative ones from the same. The license agreement calls for a vanilla Rossi test type of measurement (deltaT before and after the reactor). We will know more when the report comes out but it is only of academic interest. Had Rossi been able to make his reactors work under [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] test conditions both he and [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] would have wanted to continue, and [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] would not have said what they did say. They are not people to deny LENR in front of their eyes, even if they cannot yet replicate it.

It is also possible there was no real customer though that has never been my expectation - I have got a good sense of how Rossi does things.

Alan,

Would you care to explain why it is relevant? [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] will have plentiful evidence that Rossi's 31 reactors (Lugano and 24 hour test) which tested to work do not do so in their own tests. Without that evidence they would not be turning their back on the Rossi miracle. A massive embarrassment for them. To put it mildly.

Given that evidence how can they believe the 1 year test - whether the customer is real or no?

Rossi also has a string $89m motivation to help them get reactors to work. With interests so aligned, and a technical task apparently simple given the reactors work under Rossi's tests, it is not credible that the reactors can't be made to work unless they truely never did.

The obsessive focus on IP rights to make business on one side and to keep some control on the other side is the origin of this mess. While one of the stakeholder needs to expand its ecosystem to protect its position and investment, the other is trying to leverage an initial competitive advantage based on an unique.... There is no question the technology. It works. Issue is about IP. For now, it is even not a zero sum value game. It is a lost-lost game.

Thomas, if I read the Agreement correctly, the 89 million payment was not contingent on [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] replicating the effect, but on a positive report on the 1MW plant.

Quote from Pierre Ordinaire

Thomas, if I read the Agreement correctly, the 89 million payment was not contingent on <a href="https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/wiki/index.php/Entry/7-IH/">[lexicon]IH[/lexicon]</a> replicating the effect, but on a positive report on the 1MW plant.

Yes. I'm no lawyer so I may be wrong. But my understanding is that the terms of a license agreement, if breached, void the license. There is no requirement for future payments to be made, so Rossi has no claim on the $89M.

Also, the issue here (if it is an issue) is not about replication in the sense of new reactors. We have 31 hot-cat reactors, 30 from the Penon test made by (I think) Rossi, 1 from the Lugano test made by [lexicon]IH[/lexicon].

These reactors work when tested by Rossi's independent testers, but the same reactors do not work when tested by [lexicon]IH[/lexicon]. And cannot, with Rossi's help, be got to work. That is a pretty surprising thing. The reactors are not exactly complex to use, and we know how they were used. It is the fact that Rossi's "independent tests" don't seem to be replicable that is at issue, not whether or not [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] can replicate the reactor.

Rossi claims this reactor works and could shortly be on sale. Pretty strange if [lexicon]IH[/lexicon], with his help, cannot get it to work in some different test setup even after 12 months trying?

On one side we have [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] making vague statements prepared by a communication firms and their lawyers.

On the other side, we have Rossi giving very specific info, such as:
"After the replication they made with the attendance of Woodford in 2013 Mr Tom Darden said publicly: ” this replication has been stellar” ( witnesses available)."

If Rossi behaves logically, he wouldn't be making this up if he couldn't back it up in court.

Cherokee recently registered domains such as luxenergyltd.com. Would they do that if they didn't believe in LENR?

My guess is that Cherokee found a competitor of Rossi with whom they have a better relationship and/or better contracts/deals.

Rossi says:

Quote

Now, let me talk to you of a very singular coincidence: Brillouin has always made only electrolytic apparatuses: go to read all their patent applications made before their agreement with [lexicon]IH[/lexicon], and you will find confirmation of what I am saying ( I know their patents by heart, because I have studied them and probably I know them better than themselves : I wrote about 100 pages of notes about their patents ). And now the singular coincidence: they make the agreement with [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] in April 2015, and Voilà, they made a public demo in Capitol Hill ( Washington, DC) with a device that is the Copy-Cat of something I am familiar with. Nothing that Brillouin has ever made before the agreement with [lexicon]IH[/lexicon]. What a coincidence !!!

Again, I have to rely a bit on Rossi's words. But it is definitely a possibility that [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] managed to make the e-cat work, and they took the technology to a competitor who was happy not to ask for $100 million.

An interesting comment from Rossi wrt Customer issue:

"
Andrea Rossi
April 8, 2016 at 9:54 AM
Teemu:
I knew the Customer in the office of my Attorney Henry Johnson. They were enthusiast to test our 1 MW plant, to see if it really worked, because they were ( and are ) interested to buy more plants for their facilities in Europe. They wanted not to be exposed, though, therefore incorporated JM Products and made a plant for their production to make the test and appointed President their Attorney, who was also, as I said, my Attorney. [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] knew all this and agreed, obviously, on this, making a rental agreement with JM Products to make the test in their factory. When [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] met with the President of JM in Raleigh, I was present and I explained that he was also my Attorney. No problem has been raised by [lexicon]IH[/lexicon].
Warm Regards,
A.R.
"

exciting story & exciting times :cookie:

Regarding [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] patent filings, I emailed Rossi and asked specific questions about electrical details in WO2015127263, in August 2015, quoting portions of the application.
Rossi then responded that only his attorneys could deal with him on questions regarding it.
I thought it was an unusual reply, but then considered that I was essentially asking for IP clarification, which he will not do, and never has in any email I sent to him.

So if he was not aware before then of the international [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] patent application filings, he certainly was after my email. (That WO application linked to a US version, as the reference filing, and contained the exploded diagrams of the various reactors).

So he has at least since that long ago to start accumulating his 18 books of notes.

Quote from AlainCo

This is not so bad as you can translate into :

this ###### inventor did not give us the secret sauce...

Even, if Rossi says the opposite.

Words are important. But like with gamberale, bounded claims may hide a deeper problem...

The version of Rossi is 100% opposite, and coherent, but it is a fight and I won't trust anyone's claims without evidence.
Evidence is that [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] paid, was funded by Woodford, was proud in China and Padua, but moderately enthusiastic...

Hard to ignore any claims of any camp, and hard to trust any of those claims too.

what a mess.

Display More

Mariana
October 20th, 2015 at 12:23 AM
Dear Dr Andrea Rossi:
Why did you write that it is heavy to answer the question about when will it possible to invest in Leonardo Corporation?

Andrea Rossi
October 20th, 2015 at 9:34 AM
Mariana:
Because I want first to complete the tests on course. There is a big difference between professional investors, expert of finance, and persons like a Reader of this blog: I want not to play foot-ball with the bones of the others.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Andrea Rossi
January 17th, 2016 at 8:41 AM
Chris Beall:
Your question is not easy to be answered. I would say this: we must wait the completion of the tests on course; we are very close to an industrial product and we have an enormous potential, put in evidence by a portfolio in the order of billions, but we still must put a disclaimer: the final results could be positive or negative.
Our ship is still a warship, not a cruise ship and who enters our ship must be fully aware that he is going to fight, not to make a cruise, and that the result of a fight could also end up with casualties. All the guys presently in our ship are perfectly aware of this. This having been said, I can slightly modify my motto this way:
” I want not to play foot ball with the bones of persons that are not professional American foot ball players”. By the way: Go Panthers!
Warm Regards,
A.R.

For many years now, Rossi has be playing a devious game with the money managers, capitalists, and bean counters, to get the resources that he has desperately needed to advance his product development but at the same time to keep control of his IP. Rossi has had to walk on a knifes edge for these three years in his dealings with [lexicon]IH[/lexicon].

Rossi knows how professional money managers and venture capitalists think from his years of experience dealing with the mafia. He has extracted as much resources as he could from [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] before [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] could become his competitor using his own IP. Sure he kept critical IP information back as a prophylactic against treachery that he knew would most likely come from [lexicon]IH[/lexicon].

Who could expect justice and morality from a money manager faced with the prospects of a thousand trillion dollars of revenue at his fingertips. Fair play only goes so far and their comes a point where it grows too expensive to indulge in.

Rossi was playing a dirty game with his sponsors, but he knew that they would betray him somewhere along the way at the money making potential of his invention became clear. In this game of "it't just business" who can make a moral judgement about what is right and what is wrong.

Like Pi, has Rossi gotten far enough down the R&D road to protest himself from the tigers that have shared and will share his boat going forward?
--------------------------------------------

Andrea Rossi

April 6, 2016 at 4:07 PM

Domenico Canino:

This time the story goes that “Meucci” has the patent, the industry, the product and whomever will try to compete against us will discover what is there under the tip of the iceberg.

Warm Regards

A.R.

Rossi has discovered many things in his years of constant trial and error R&D. He might have only given [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] a bare minimum to get that 11.5 million. Old tech that Rossi has long ago discarded. He might have held back the Cat/Mouse COP amplifier method. [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] might just have been able to produce a COP that a mouse can generate(< 2). For many years. Rossi's reactors worked poorly and would melt down when he tried to push that COP over 6. But then Rossi discovered the Cat/Mouse configuration.

The Lugano test was a demonstration of [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] LENR technology that was in place just a few months ago. Rossi supported the test but had nothing to do with it or had any stake in that test succeeding. The state of [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] LENR tech as shown by Lugano was poor even if Rossi told [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] how to produce the fuel. The Lugano test was used for [lexicon]IH[/lexicon]'s patent application.

When [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] saw a COP of 50, [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] knew Rossi was not giving [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] all his ways and means. Brilliouin is not a system that can use Mouse/Cat amplification. So the Rossi IP transfer to Brilliouin had a big problem: Oops! These two systems were incompatible. The stealing of Rossi IP was plane for Rossi to see but the hold back of that IP by Rossi was not apparent until during and after the Third party one year test. [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] though, we want a COP of 50 too. No 90,000,000 until we get the entire E-Cat tech package.

Rossi does not need [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] anymore and he was looking for a way out from under the [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] contract without giving [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] that 50 COP package. [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] has the COP 6 package but they wanted that real good stuff that Rossi was helding back from [lexicon]IH[/lexicon].

[lexicon]IH[/lexicon] got money from the Chinese and the English on the hope of commercial level heat production but Rossi has held that back somehow. Now Rossi is home free and on his way to market with a huge new area to sell into that [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] has lost.

How Rossi got the COP 50 mods past [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] without losing his IP is a testament to how smart that Rossi is. He is a man playing with boys.

Pierre Ordinaire said "Thomas, if I read the Agreement correctly, the 89 million payment was not contingent on [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] replicating the effect, but on a positive report on the 1MW plant."

Exactly...!

And the jury will tell everyone if the report is positive or not, and it will be,
the jury will not tell us if the eCat has worked as expected or not (I mean, they will not tell us if the report is error free or not).

But for the status of the contract, it's sufficient.

Hi all

If [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] say in the courts that they do not think Rossi's technology works so split with him, and have not sent formal notice of the same, then their actions default their contract and Rossi is then free to license any company to use his IP in [lexicon]IH[/lexicon]'s former licensed markets, and can sue them for breaking contract, and sue them if they attempt to use his IP in any of those markets and there is not a thing they can do about it.

Kind Regards walker

Quote

and can sue them for breaking contract,

Why do you think this licensing agreement has any penalties for non-compliance other than ceding the license? I think if it id they would have to be written into the agreement, as for example Rossi giving back the payments is.

It is a License Agreement, not an unconditional contract