Clearance Items

  • This reminds me of a comment from a wise old legal eagle. "If a man tries to steal your wallet in the street, you may punch him on the nose, but if a lawyer threatens to sue you for it, give it to him immediately."

  • So, if Rossi accuses someone of libel in the form of a law suit, the burden to prove libel to the court is Rossi's. And that will require him to prove the accusation is a lie to the satisfaction of the court.

    Not entirely true. It might is some cases be enough to prove the damage done by the libel. Especially if the libel actions are out-of-proportions or the damages are big compared to the potential crime. Also the intention of the libel actions might be considered.

  • sifferkoll

    I think you might be confusing several things here. In order to claim for damages caused by what might be termed 'petty libel' you would have to demonstrate loss consequent to reputational damage. For example, if someone posted on a blog that a famous actor was 'an obnoxious pig who can never remember his lines' that would perhaps be enough to initiate a claim against the blogger for actual damage caused by the blog. A lost movie opportunity for example. In order to do this, one preferably needs a pretty good reputation in the first place and clear proof of a lost opportunity,

    I am not sure what you mean by:-

    if the libel actions are out-of-proportions or the damages are big compared to the potential crime.

    -but maybe my first paragraph covers this.

  • No, I do not think I'm confused.

    I was primarily referring to accusations regarding criminal activities; like fraud or pedophilia etc. (there is a difference in calling someone obnoxious pig and fraudster/pedophile) Otherwise you are correct. No doubt it is hard to prove lost business opportunities but the point is that at least according to swedish law it is not ok to say anything just because you think it is true (like someone being a fraudster or pedophile) - even if it at some later stage turns out to be correct. Although it will of course be to your advantage.

    The correct way to do it is to report criminals to the police. Broadcasting your opinions about someone looking like a pig, is too a much larger extent covered by the freedom of speech than accusing of fraud. This is an important distinction.

  • The above commentators appear to ignore the difference in libel/slander laws between countries. The US is exceptionally liberal in favor of free speech therefore Rossi would absolutely have to prove that the accusation of fraud was a lie if he sued. The way this would happen would be similar to the Rossi vs IH vs Rossi trial. The individual or group being sued by Rossi would present evidence that Rossi made false claims and cheated various companies and organizations. To prevail, Rossi would have to show that those accusations are false. The most obvious way to do this would be to show that the thermoelectric devices for DOD were real and worked as he said they did and that the ecat(s) work. He can't do that so he would lose. Ad of course, there would be much more to it. But the depositions already done for the IH case would go a long ways to prove that Rossi is indeed a fraud. Much of the work for the person claiming fraud would already have been done. Much of Rossi's fraud is glaringly self evident which is why it is extremely unlikely (but not impossible) that he would sue someone accusing him of it. At the end, he would also have to show damages in order to obtain compensation. So Rossi would have to show that someone calling him a fraud was false because all his stuff works and that the claimed defamation was willful and malicious and he had lost business or reputation because of the defamation. Not easy things. Especially for Professor Signore El Dottore Rossi.

    The problem for the "suees" would be that they have to pay for their defense, at least initially. If they won, they could then petition the court for costs. My very limited experience is that courts are reluctant to award costs so as not to discourage suits. But a libel suit by Rossi would be so outrageous that in that case, the court might indeed award costs. I emphasize again that I am not a lawyer though I have had to suffer through a couple of civil trials and I can tell you they are time consuming, expensive and a royal pain in the posterior. For both sides. For anyone except the lawyers.

  • Quote

    Since there is so much talk now about slander, here an interessting report about KPP Rosch (this are the ones who promote the buoyancy power plant) takeing some guy to court because this guy called them on his website a scam.

    KPP Rosch dropped the lawsuit last minute (just before the the reports from independent technical experts would have been disclosed)…ee-energy-trial-ends-now/

    When James Randi's foundation exposed Sniffex as a fraud, he was sued. The suit was similarly dropped before independent technical experts could perform tests on the device. Strange how that works. You may recall that Sniffex was sold as an explosive detector but was really a dowsing rod which when tested by many different agencies, detected nothing. It and similar devices did and probably still do maim and kill many people who rely on them to detect explosives and IED's, especially in S. E. Asia and the Middle East and IIRC Africa where they can still be promoted and sold. Amusingly, Lomax the abdominable snow man, still thinks these things have merit. I propose giving him one and turning him loose with it in a minefield so he can prove it if he thinks we are slandering the makers.

  • I can tell you they are time consuming, expensive and a royal pain in the posterior. For both sides. For anyone except the lawyers.

    Exactly, and that is why this is most probably a hypothetical discussion. There is not enough upside. So you can feel safe Mary. You do not need to worry that much, and can most certainly continue your slander/hate and libel crusade even without any sign of evidence.

  • I feel safe because I only point out the rather obvious truth which only a handful of acolytes refuse to see.

    Well, you obviously either believe that with a vengeance (emotionally conditioned by hate - which hardly leads to a rational analysis) or you are doing an exceptionally eager job to make it look that way. I do not know which one is the worst.

  • Hey, Siffie, courts rely mostly on expert opinion. Any idea how many actual experts in nuclear physics would say Rossi has the real deal vs the ease of finding top notch well known best in the field people who would say he is full of sh*t?


    "Experts" say exactly what they are paid to say. That is why they are called "experts". And get paid ... Incentives are everything. Nuclear physics, medicine, parapsychology, AGW - doesn't matter.

  • Rossi knows that however blatant the errors, he can bluff it out and his fans will find excuses for him. IHFB, for example, might view this public demo as a ruse designed to prevent competition from taking his work seriously. ECW guys will be very inventive in finding some technical solution, however unlikely, which makes observed events consistent with the device working.

    He does not have that hard a job. And of course he is good at putting on a show. i don't think he worries about technical accuracy. His goal will be the adulation of those present (who it would seem are all predisposed to give him the benefit of the doubt) and beyond that his supporters who do the same. So the more doubt the better, and given Rossi's minimalist approach to instrumentation there will likely be lots of doubt.

    Ouch. Having a change of script THH? All about vomiting on the potential fans & demo attendants now, is it? Fake facts are out, right? Maybe you are merging with the MY handle?

    Moved from another thread. Eric

  • Hahaha. MY and writing books...

    It will be published the very same day pigs learn how to fly.

  • Has the country of the test been revealed yet? Somehow I think it will be neither the USA nor Sweden, but not Italy either.

    perhaps it will be in one of those robotic assemble plants or the industrial manufactureing plants that he sold a 1MW system to back in 2013. That would be much more impressive.

  • There is also a chance he is so bound and determined to do this without letting anyone see the process or the material for safety.

    What money can do to most will keep them too occupied to know when to quit to prevent a possibly massively bad event.

    rRunaway chain reactions suck.

  • Quote

    Well, all those attending know, but have been asked not to reveal the location. Not long to wait.

    Classical Rossi screwing around with people for nothing. What possible difference can it make to anyone if he announces the city it's scheduled for? Unless it's a tiny village somewhere, nobody would know the actual venue.

  • Quote

    Hahaha. MY and writing books...

    It will be published the very same day pigs learn how to fly.

    I thought, and I suppose am still thinking, about a web page and maybe a book warning about and describing some free energy scams and other high tech scams like Sniffex, Carl Tilley, Dennis Lee, Jeff Otto, Steorn, Rossi and Defkalion. Also perhaps such varied topics as talking to the dead, psychics, near death experiences and more such "woowoo". My current thinking is that such an opus would do little to deter the likes of Darden and Vaugh and Woodford. Also, there is perverted fun in watching such ventures proceed. So, probably not. As for flying pigs, that will happen a lot sooner than anyone is likely to find a practical means of extracting Ni-H fusion energy. I am not venturing a guess either way about Pd-D though, so far, I don't see anything compelling.

    If this is too OT, someone please move it.

  • Quote

    Who precisely is he skewing around? You? All those attending have known for anything up to 2 weeks.

    He is screwing with the peanut gallery of observers here and at ECW. Nobody else in the world likely cares much. I think Rossi does that for fun and ego gratification. Who knows? Or really, who cares?