Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

Quote from oldguy

If the patents are to be valid they must teach someone skilled in the art how to make them work. If the patents are to be valid or if the IP was to be truly transferred as required by the agreement, there should be no need to contact the inventor.

The license specified the IP to be transferred. Most of the list involved know-how or trade secrets rather than patents. My initial read was that the provision was drafted to basically require Rossi to hand over instructions, but not background research, not information on past failures, not anything on why the device worked, etc. (But there was a provision about hiring Rossi as chief scientist.)

That's relevant, I think, because it does lend a very limited amount of weight to the argument that IH's failures may have been due to failing to exactly follow the directions.

Quote from MikeDunford

The license specified the IP to be transferred. Most of the list involved know-how or trade secrets rather than patents. My initial read was that the provision was drafted to basically require Rossi to hand over instructions, but not background research, not information on past failures, not anything on why the device worked, etc. (But there was a provision about hiring Rossi as chief scientist.)

That's relevant, I think, because it does lend a very limited amount of weight to the argument that IH's failures may have been due to failing to exactly follow the directions.

Do you think that Rossi did transfer the technology when he spent year or so in NC "teaching" the IP to IH? I don't think that IH would say that he fully transferred the tech and that they spent money trying many ways. If it was transferred, don't you think that they would be using it and commercializing now?

Quote from IH Fanboy

That seems like a new allegation to me. So Rossi never spent any time with IH? No time with helping Dameron? He never told Darden the fuel mixture? It seems like you are going out on a pretty flimsy limb here. All one has to do is read the deposition record to see that what you suggest is bollocks.

What's cool about your comments, IHFB, is that sometimes your conclusions show that you know more about what went on in this case, and what the various parties were thinking, then Darden, Vaughn, the guy at Boeing, Dewey, or even Dottore Rossi himself!

It's what makes your contribution here so .... you!

Quote from Rends

NO!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property

I stand by what I said. There are criminal statutes on the books in quite a few places, but:

(1) Even where there are criminal statutes in place, they generally only criminalize infringement in limited circumstances. (Generally, it has to be intentional infringement for commercial gain.)

(2) Even where there is a criminal statute in place and circumstances that could lead to criminal prosecution, actual prosecution is the exception, not the norm. The norm is for the matter to be handled through civil infringement proceedings.

Basically, if you're running a major operation that involves deliberately making counterfeit goods (not just knock-offs, but true counterfeits), the chances of criminal penalties are low.

And from everything I've seen in the facts of this case so far (which is admittedly incomplete), and based on my knowledge of US law, I'm not seeing any evidence of anything that even looks like a criminal intellectual property offence.

Quote from oldguy

Do you think that Rossi did transfer the technology when he spent year or so in NC "teaching" the IP to IH? I don't think that IH would say that he fully transferred the tech and that they spent money trying many ways. If it was transferred, don't you think that they would be using it and commercializing now?

I think that the agreement was so poorly conceived that if Rossi's thing worked during the tests only because of some complete fluke and Rossi handed over the instructions on how to build them, he performed fully and gets the whole amount even if nobody on the planet ever figures out how to replicate the original result.

As to whether or not Rossi's device actually worked (and, by extension, whether there was any genuine IP to transfer) - at the moment, that doesn't strike me as very likely.

Quote from Dewey Weaver

OG - how much do you figure 100 meters of 6" diameter steam pipe weighs?

What if a warehouse is built to structurally support heavy loads on its upper level ?

Quote from sigmoidal

What's cool about your comments, IHFB, is that sometimes your conclusions show that you know more about what went on in this case, and what the various parties were thinking,

He is the proverbial fly on the wall.

Proverbial . . . I assume. He doesn't for a spy agency and didn't actually "bug" them. Right?

Quote from Roger

What if a warehouse is built to structurally support heavy loads on its upper level ?

Smith testified that it was not. Especially, the staircase could not have supported the materials being carried up it:

"The only access to the mezzanine is a rickety wooden stairs, which the attorneys made this author climb first (load test) before they would use it."

Quote from JedRothwell

He is the proverbial fly on the wall.

Proverbial . . . I assume. He doesn't for a spy agency and didn't actually "bug" them. Right?

I dunno, he bugs us, so.... maybe?

Quote from Rends

.. and I'm not even able to speak English

Ihr Englisch ist viel besser als unser Deutsch.

Quote from sigmoidal

What's cool about your comments, IHFB, is that sometimes your conclusions show that you know more about what went on in this case, and what the various parties were thinking, then Darden, Vaughn, the guy at Boeing, Dewey, or even Dottore Rossi himself!

With all of the idiocy related to this affair, sometimes I feel that way as well.

Quote from Rends

I am from Europe like all the professors named in the Lugano Report and this is our law:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…hts_of_the_European_Union

Rends, come on, you can do better than this!

First you say IH violated intellectual property laws with no specific citation, but rather cite the ENTIRE Docket.

Then you point to the ENTIRE EU Charter of Fundamental Rights to somehow support your assertions about IP violations (even though you are the one asserting 'intellectual property' law).

It's like someone citing the Encyclopedia Britannica (in total) to back up the claim that cats have 9 lives.

Quote from JedRothwell

Smith testified that it was not. Especially, the staircase could not have supported the materials being carried up it:

"The only access to the mezzanine is a rickety wooden stairs, which the attorneys made this author climb first (load test) before they would use it."

Smith's report is so full of misdirection. He includes a photo of a window with big bold red arrows pointing to everything except, ahem, the two missing glass window panels. I had to look at the photo several times before I even noticed, because of his slight of hand.

He does the same with his description of the wooden staircase. Oh, what a beauty in terms of choice of word: rickety. It just rolls off the tongue. RICKETY. One imagines it teetering back and forth as one climbs it. Nobody in their right minds would use a rickety stair case. Common. Give me the pipes. I'll carry them up a wood stair case one at a time. Maybe hire a couple of helpers to get the job done. This isn't rocket science. And Smith has revealed himself to be less than a straight shooter.

Quote from Rends

I am from Europe like all the professors named in the Lugano Report and this is our law:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…hts_of_the_European_Union

You can be from anywhere you want. You're still wrong.

And, frankly, all you accomplished by posting a Wikipedia link to the Charter at me was to further convince me that you don't know what you are talking about.

First, and let's just clear this out of the way at the start, the Charter of Fundamental Rights doesn't help you very much here. Article 17(2) is the only provision that deals with intellectual property, and if I recall correctly (I might be off by a couple of words, and honestly can't be bothered to look it up at the moment) 17(2) consists of a single sentence that says something to the effect of "intellectual property rights shall be protected." It doesn't specify what form that protection need to take, and there are lots of rights that are routinely protected through civil litigation rather than criminal prosecution.

Second, while there have been some attempts to harmonize IP law, the vast bulk of substantive IP law remains within the competence of the member states. That is likely to change to an extent for patent law when the European Patent Court becomes fully operational, but that is yet to occur.

Third, although there was an attempt at a Directive on criminal penalties for IP offences about ten years ago, that attempt ultimately failed. No attempt has been made since, and none is on the horizon.

Fourth, that directive was targeted only at wilfull counterfeiting on a commercial scale.

Fifth, that directive was targeted only at copyright and trademark infringement; patents would not have been affected.

Sixth, let me say again, that directive failed utterly.

Seventh, there genuinely is a broad international consensus that criminal penalties should be reserved for only large scale, wilfull counterfeiting. Or at least that's more or less what the European Intellectual Property Law text (authored by Annette Kur and Thomas Dreiser; ISBN 978-1-84844-880-3) says on one of the 6 pages in the entire 548-page book that are devoted to the topic of criminal sanctions in IP law in Europe.

Eighth, my textbook on English IP law (Cornish, Llewelyn, & Alpin) says similar things in the 4 numbered paragraphs that this 948-page book devotes to criminal penalties in IP law.

Ninth, criminal prosecutions for IP violations are so rare in the US that they're not taught in either criminal law or IP law.

Tenth - and I could go on, but I think more should be unnecessary - I have formal legal training both in the US and England.

Quote from Rends

Ich denke, daß hätte (wenn es wirklich so wäre) viele Kriege verhindert und aber-Millionen Menschenleben gerettet!

...aber hätte, hätte, Fahrradkette...

Ja, ich hatte auch die Gelegenheit, die Welt zu retten, als ich jung und allwissend war, ... aber hätte, hätte, Fahrradkette.