As you seem to like playing lawyer, please provide your evidence (which does not include RossiSays, FrankSays, or AASays) for all those factual conclusions you just stated. You can't so I suggest you stick to something else (I would say your area of expertise, but I am not sure there is one). Also, please let us all know what law school you attended and when you graduated.
I have spent a huge amount of time writing specifications, Listing requirements, designing test plans, developing System Requirements, developing capability demonstrations, producing System test/acceptance plan, participating in negotiations between vendors and customers, and understanding customer/vendor behavior based on associated controlling regulations. It's been awhile and I have forgotten a lot, but I know enough still to consider the management of the Rossi contract that IH conducted was managed by a legion of morons.
If ABB is Rossi's new partner, then they will have enough experience to know enough to control what Rossi does to advance their business strategies. Whoever Rossi's partner is, they are doing a good job in controlling, managing, and directing Rossi.
I did not pay attention to the IH test because from early on I judged that the year long test was going to be a disaster and that IH was going to get screwed. And they deserved what they brought onto themselves. Could IH have acted so stupidly in dealing with Rossi, do they share in Rossi's culpability
victim culpability
Benjamin Mendelsohn's delineates a typology of criminal victims. The typology consists of six categories: (1) completely innocent victims; (2) victims with minor guilt; (3) voluntary victims; (4) victims more guilty than the offender; (5) victims who alone are guilty; and (6) the imaginary victims.