Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

Quote from ele

No you are wrong. That patent was filed by IH (assignee) not Rossi himself !

It was IH and Darden that (without having the rights to do so) have copied the Lugano Report and filed the patent.

Rossi files his own patents for the Leonardo Corp. and one patent regarding the Ecat was GRANTED.

yes, that was by IH but I have not seen any by Rossi that would cover what is in the Lugano Report. Does he have an issued patent that covers the procedure and material in the claims. If not......

Quote from ele

No you are wrong. That patent was filed by IH (assignee) not Rossi himself !

It was IH and Darden that (without having the rights to do so) have copied the Lugano Report and filed the patent.

Rossi files his own patents for the Leonardo Corp. and one patent regarding the Ecat was GRANTED.

I am looking for something from Rossi along the lines of a method of generating heat in excess of .....

The one I remember specified silly things like a cylindrical tube.... things like that. which means if someone made a square tube it would not be covered.

Quote from JedRothwell

How do you know this? Did you attend the meetings with Woodford? Have you discussed this with them? If this is true, why hasn't Woodford taken the money back?

I think you made that up. It is your imagination. You have a vivid imagination.

A vivid imagination? Woodford themselves said that Rossi's technology was a core element of their initial investment. The sad thing is, you know this, you've seen the email, and you still outright deny it.

Link for those just coming up to speed.

Quote from [email protected]

If someone were to set up a parallel library to yours, but didn't care about Copyright laws like Cornell, how much trouble would they get into?

I don't know. I wouldn't want to find out. Steve Krivit may have done that.

Rends the biased moderator, (in the spirit of "Puff the Magic Dragon") is going to get a helping hand tonight. When you have paid up rights to what was promised to be the invention of the century and your licensor is publishing papers / making disclosures on the invention without your blessing then you have no choice but to file the paper as a provisional with a plan to clean it up later if anything worth protecting was disclosed. Its called purchased rights to IP using a provisional filing protection strategy and, believe it or not, it is a good legal / IP strategy. With that helpful hint, you can stop spinning other tales and yarns and get back to your job as moderator.

Thanks for playing.

@Dewey,

I understand that IH would want to play it safe and file the application, adding its own co-inventor, and protecting its interests. This only speaks to IH's knowledge of the importance and value of the e-Cat technology. In fact, IH continues to pursue the application, making appropriate amendments to the claims to put them into better form. Again, not a surprise, given what IH knows about the e-Cat.

It is the pretense that IH projects to the world that the e-Cat doesn't work that seems disingenuous. And the fact that IH states that their efforts to replicate failed--at all times no less! When such statements are clearly contradicted by what we now have revealed to us on the record. Why the pretense? Why the misdirection? Did IH really feel the need to take it to that extreme to win this dispute? Could IH have not decided to be more forthcoming from the beginning, and let the chips fall where they may?

And this notion that Leonardo/Rossi, the owner of the technology, cannot use his invention in the unlicensed territories--territories for which IH doesn't have a license, is ridiculous. As owner of the invention, Leonardo can continue to file its own patent applications, and those applications will eventually be published, no matter whether this irks IH or not. The e-Cat/Quark X will continue to be developed, and put into the marketplace in territories that are not licensed by IH, no matter whether this irks IH or not.

Don't act like IH is king of the world. Don't presume that you can put the damper on the e-Cat worldwide. Your efforts will be futile, and you will ultimately fail. Those who attempt to impede world-changing technologies will ultimately fail. The Internet has changed everything, and particularly this.

IHFB - I am sad to report that your lecture and notions have once again fallen on deaf ears mainly because you don't know what in the hell you are talking about. Nothing new there.

But don't worry - be happy. Every day is a new day on Planet Rossi and you have shown the uncanny ability to always find a way to turn sewage into unsweetened lemonade. May your merry pace continue! Drink up!!

I'll take the unsweetened lemonade visuals over the full metal jacket war imagery all day, although I do somewhat miss the over-the-top Dewey that once roamed these quarters.

Quote from ele

No you are wrong. That patent was filed by IH (assignee) not Rossi himself !

It was IH and Darden that (without having the rights to do so) have copied the Lugano Report and filed the patent.

Rossi files his own patents for the Leonardo Corp. and one patent regarding the Ecat was GRANTED.

i.e. that "one patent "regarding" the Ecat" being: "The Turbo Hotdog Cooker" patent, ONLY a crude vessel with resistive heaters is claimed and granted (no claims of LENR, no formulas, no "fuels", etc.) . Others are a hoard of useless patent APPLICATIONS, none granted.

"Toujours en retard: d'une année, d'une armée et d'une idée"

Napoleon on Austria

No hints in IH application or AR patent of "special fuel" quoted in Cassarino handwritten notes - the only "fuel" (imported from elsewhere and not easily available in US (see Tom's failures)) that can turn sewage into unsweetened lemonade.

Perhaps in Sweden Zlomanczuk, Jozef ... .

https://katalog.uu.se/orginfo/?orgId=X233:1

Quote from Rends

Dewey Weaver

Since you are, so to speak, part of the IH-team that is counseling the people in matters of business, shows your attitude and your dealing with the topic "respect the rights of others" very well, what sort of man you are.

For that, many heartfelt thanks!

Moderators on this forum should steer this difficult discussion objectively and gently from a higher altitude, to avoid faning the flames additinally here in this difficult topic. To much unneccessary pro & con fighting going on already.

Quote from JedRothwell

I gather this is imaginary testimony. It is wrong. They did replicate the heat. They replicated it in an empty cell, which proves that it was a calorimetry error.

Penon's report shows there was no heat in the giant 1 MW reactor.

I wonder if the dummy reactor that supplied excess heat, which IH refer to, was the one that Boeing tested. Childress claimed that the dummy reactor he made put out slightly more heat than the reactor supplied by IH (which apparently had the wrong fuel in it). If so his claims mean less than nothing at this point.

RiRi - Another classic Planet Rossi ponderance and the answer is nope. There were many Boeing made reactors tested with R's fuel. We still have them. None of them worked.

Rends has always worked for Planet Rossi - plain and simple.

AhiAhi - talk about sewage into lemonade - check this one out.

Nice one Wyttie - so noble of you to step up with this classic Planet Rossi slantification, especially after the actual "fake news" that your crew has been putting out for several weeks now. Rossi partners like Michael Pizzato don't get arrested at Miami International Airport then go to jail in Switzerland and Germany based on fake news now do they? There is a torrent of additional material available for the unleashing if you want to play that game.

VERY peculiar interest for sewage pipes

AhiAhi - so nice of you to continue to telegraph your script. We'll be waiting for you.

Wyttie - please expand on your thoughts.