Cutting Through the Fog Surrounding the Rossi/IH Dispute (Josh G)

  • Frank - I'm going to try and do a better job at being nice to you because you need some help.
    Where do you get that the ERV is in the court docket? I can share that IH has no obligation to put it there. In fact, it is not even marked as a confidential document by Penon / Rossi which is interesting in and of itself.


    If a jury seating becomes necessary, many matters in this litigation will be decided long before a jury is even contemplated.

  • Deleo - you're way off. Darden was invited to Sweden for multiple reasons. The Uppsala folks have been studying alumina emissivity and other IR camera matters on their own initiative for quite some time now.
    We only recently became aware of that.

  • Quote

    Frank - I'm going to try and do a better job at being nice to you because you need some help. Where do you get that the ERV is in the court docket? I can share that IH has no obligation to put it there. In fact, it is not even marked as a confidential document by Penon / Rossi which is interesting in and of itself. If a jury seating becomes necessary, many matters in this litigation will be decided long before a jury is even contemplated.


    Frank didn't actually assert that it was in the docket. Basically, he was asking you if you knew enough to confirm whether it was or not.


    That's all


    I enjoy your posts, by the way. Not that I have a clue WHY you post them.

  • Nigel - sport and counter-espionage for the real and imaginary inhabitants of Planet Rossi.
    By the way, storm and chatter reports indicate that the living and fabricated citizens of Planet Rossi are not having one of their better days. Live by the IP sword, die by the IP sword.

  • Quote from Argon: “Quote from sifferkoll: “"Fake" customer is a new epithete. Really really strange as you stated that you did not even start to worry about the test until late autumn in earlier posts !!!!! If the ERV report sais COP 50…


    @sifferkoll Yes after reading you blog, i have to re consider what I said.
    '- Dewey have not been in IH:s real inner wheel at that time. He wasn't even aware of problems with ERV until around time when Rossi sent their case to court..'
    OK it was not just Mr Weaver, but also IH who got taken by surprise when Mr Rossi wanted the trial instead of settling dispute with IH. That stil lfits the schedule I had in mind. This actually makes things more exiting and as you said points to direction that it is not about COP>0 but what they got from Rossi, and validity of whole license if Celanis patent practically invalidates it.
    Maybe Quark-X gets around Celanis IP, but Rossi considers that to be outside IH-license, thats why they need this campaign.
    Luckily we don't need to wait long, ERV report must come into binder pretty soon, hopefully then we know more.

  • Dewey, this was posted on another site a couple of days ago.


    Snobben alan
    3 days ago
    Tom Darden has visited the Lugano Scientists in Sweden not long ago, and the information he gave them made them very confused and now they don't know what to belive. Tom Darden told them some thing like "there is no production" This is information that i got after a brief talk to Mats Lewan on the phone, I don't know if Darden meant that ther never was any production in the factory ore not? This is of course information that Mats Lewan got from the Swedish scientists. I don't know how much more information Mats Lewan got. But i know that all involved parts feel very unsure right now. I know that for just a couple of months ago the sweds didn't missbelive anything. So very bad information has been deliverd...
    1 Reply



    Mats Lewan
    3 days ago
    I can confirm what 'Snobben' writes and I also have written evidence (although I would have liked Snobben to check with me first, before spreading this info!).

  • Quote from Nigel Appleton

    If it's the case that IH never saw evidence of LENR producing excess heat, why on earth did they pay the the first lot of money?


    If they thought they did, then changed their minds, will they be countersuing to get their money back?


    Beats me. If you read the license agreement it pays no real attention to whether the ecat works at all. It deals with COP above certain levels and such stuff which has more to do with commercial viability. Either technical feasibility was already resolved in a technical due diligence pre contract or they forgot about it.

  • Deleo - Mats seemed to be aware of certain details from the Sweden meeting within 30 minutes of it ending. The posted interpretation seems pretty far off from my understanding of the discussion. The Uppsala folks are good people and they want to set the record straight if their revised findings mandate a change to the Lugano report. I don't know exactly where they are in their review at present or what their timeframe will be but do know they are well into this reconsideration. We'll all know soon enough.

  • Quote

    Snobben alan3 days agoTom Darden has visited the Lugano Scientists in Sweden not long ago, and the information he gave them made them very confused and now they don't know what to belive. Tom Darden told them some thing like "there is no production" This is information that i got after a brief talk to Mats Lewan on the phone, I don't know if Darden meant that ther never was any production in the factory ore not? This is of course information that Mats Lewan got from the Swedish scientists. I don't know how much more information Mats Lewan got. But i know that all involved parts feel very unsure right now. I know that for just a couple of months ago the sweds didn't missbelive anything. So very bad information has been deliverd...1 ReplyMats Lewan 3 days agoI can confirm what 'Snobben' writes and I also have written evidence (although I would have liked Snobben to check with me first, before spreading this info!).


    I cannot quite get my head around the proposition that Mr Darden would fly around the world spreading deliberate falsehoods; but I can't see what he might have told that group that they should not have known already - viz that severe and genuine doubts have been raised over their results as well as over everything else Rossi has been involved in.


    Nor can I see why the writer should have checked with Mats before posting.

  • Dewey


    Frank - I'm going to try and do a better job at being nice to you because you need some help.
    Where do you get that the ERV is in the court docket from? I can share that IH has no obligation to put it there. In fact, it is not even marked as a confidential document by Penon / Rossi which is interesting in and of itself.


    Why do you think I said Mr Penon (the ERV) is in the court docket, I'm not quite sure how big the 'docket' is but I'm sure Mr Penon would be pretty uncomfortable there. Perhaps you were talking about the ERV 'report', your logic is getting more and more difficult to follow, but I think I am keeping up.


    Let me explain, this will be a 'battle', each side will choose its weapons (supporting evidence), and place them in the court docket. As part of this process, IH will respond to Rossi's 'complaint, putting its point of view with the 'evidence placed in the court docket.' After that Rossi has a chance to respond to IH's defence and may bring further weapons (evidence) but this further evidence can only be in answer to the particular points made by IH.


    So if neither IH nor Rossi use the ERV report as a 'weapon' in the first instance, my guess is that Rossi will bring it on to counter IH's 'Failed Lugano' evidence if that's what they bring, which I doubt. So we may never see the ERV report in court.


    Why do I think IH will not bring the 'Failed Lugano' report. Well, it's older than the ERV report and therefore the court may feel due to the natural progress of science that as 'evidence' the ERV report is superior. It appears IH want Rossi's IP and support to make their replication 'work', which is why they have withheld the $89 million. Bringing on the 'Failed Lugano' report will risk the court judging Rossi's invention 'illusory' which will set the contract as worthless and the case will be dismissed. That is not what IH want as it will expose them to actions against them.


    So in that scenario, no Lugano no ERV report, who would have thought that!


    I hope I have been able to reciprocate the help you have kindly offered me.


    Best regards
    Frank


    PS: Try not to worry, that's only one of many scenarios' but as Tom says 'its fun'.

  • Quote

    but I can't see what he might have told that group that they should not have known already - viz that severe and genuine doubts have been raised over their results as well as over everything else Rossi has been involved in.


    People are often resistant to new ideas. I doubt they considered seriously my critique (or the web precursors) till given additional evidence from IH in-house testing. You can see from discussions with randombit0 here (who seems finally to have vanished?) how subtle the thermography is and how people can get the wrong idea about what are the issues with the original report. Like Levi saying "even if you set the emissivity to 1 you stiil get COP=2" true, but missing entirely the point.

  • Nigel - sport and counter-espionage for the real and imaginary inhabitants of Planet Rossi.
    By the way, storm and chatter reports indicate that the living and fabricated citizens of Planet Rossi are not having one of their better days. Live by the IP…


    I guess you're trying to boost to your self esteem by creating a personal virtual reality to play games in ...

  • Frank - I misunderstood your docket statement and apologize. I'm confident the Penon report will eventually be in the docket but not sure when.


    IH has paid for full access to Rossi's IP with a paid-up license fee of $11.5m - it will be hard for Rossi to legally counter that argument. It will also be hard for him to prove that he has satisfactorily fulfilled his obligation to provide working IP to IH. I do agree that whether Rossi earned the additional $89M or not will be up to the courts to decide. I don't agree with your additional logic or order of events but this is new for most folks on this board and, if this case isn't thrown out by the judge, you'll get to learn how litigation unfolds and develops. Should the case proceed, we're all going to need to be very patient though as it normally takes years for a legit dispute to work thru the legal system.

  • Sifferkoll - there you go with that Man in the Mirror gig again. Its uncanny and quite humorous.


    We have to figure out who is going to play you in the Planet Rossi movie. Mini-me quickly comes to mind. Heath Ledger would have also been great if he were still around. I'll keep working on that and get back to you with some more suggestions.

  • Frank - I misunderstood your docket statement and apologize. I'm confident the Penon report will eventually be in the docket but not sure when.


    IH has paid for full access to Rossi's IP with a paid-up license fee of $11.5m - it will be hard for Rossi…


    I am not a lawyer, seek professional help and see the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. AFAIK the process is: Petitioner files a claim. Respondent files a response (June 12 due deadline) and perhaps a counterclaim. Discovery period begins, parties can depose each other and use subpoena powers to gather evidence and testimony. Motions, trial, finding of fact, award. If certain evidence is sensitive, parties may request that it be kept under seal. If that happens, we don't see the document. However, we might see quotes from it in various filings.


    How do I buy someone's ideas that they haven't thought of yet? I get that employment agreements cover that very issue as long as the inventor is an employee. Forever is a long long time. Was Andrea Rossi subject to that kind of agreement? What was the term of that agreement?

  • Dewey


    Sniping aside now, it seems to me there is a contractual obligation for IH to pay Rossi $89 million on the culmination of the year long test subject to the ERV report being positive within certain written criteria in the contract. But I understand there was no time limit on Rossi having to provide IP and support, I assume this would be because R&D is a continuous process. So from a contractual point of view Rossi will (I surmise) say he always intended to provide support and IP throughout the R&D process which we all know could take years, perhaps tens of years, particularly if radiation issues require solving.


    Best regards
    Frank

  • Sorry @Thomas Clarke I was not planning to ignore your reply earlier in thread, but do not have enough time to go through all claims @randombit0 wrote yesterday in science behind dispute -thread.
    I personally have newer even held IR camera in my hand (except once early 80's), so I won't start analyzing her claims. Easier just to withdraw and apologize you if I misread your exchange with her. Following your dicussion with great interest still.


    Related to that, I hope you check MFMP glowstick 5.2 videos and clearly see why Lugano thermocouple data, Mr Weaver is feeding you, cannot be used in calculations. If you want to save time, ask Bob Greenyer or read his analysis from this e-catworld glowstick 5.2 thread


    or additionally even study this thread before accept Mr Weavers offer. Your call, just wanted to make you aware...

  • On a lighter note... Cutting through the Fog? ;) I just had a strange image two great knights standing in the clouds on top of a mountain one swinging his sword shouting "divide, conquer, divide conquer", the other swinging his sword saying "parry, thrust, parry, thrust". Only when the clouds cleared they realized they were standing on different mountains.


    I guess the current battle won't have as simple a resolution but in the end I hope it resolves justly.