Rossi Says His Group is Preparing for Legal Action Against Libelers

Andrea Rossi today posted on his blog his most detailed comment yet about the legal strategies he is preparing to deal with those who he calls puppets, snakes and clowns.

We know perfectly who some puppeteers are: our intelligence system is working together with the Law Firm we have engaged for this issue. We are collecting and analyzing every single phrase the Puppets, Snakes (and Clowns) are publishing in paper press and in Internet. We prefer not to sue puppets and puppeteers ( and Clowns) so far because we will be stronger when our working plants will be public: at that point we will give to the Court all the necessary evidence to win both on criminal and in civilistic fields this battle. For now we are just preparing all the necessary publications, comments, evidence, documents, addresses, etc, etc. I start the battles when I am sure to win. So far they had the sensation that our Group can be libelled for free: it is not so. All the proceeds that we will earn from these trials will be donated to families we have already selected that need money to cure the cancer of their children.
If you are interested to this issue or have information for us, please contact
[email protected]

From what he says here, not only is Rossi’s group preparing to defend its intellectual property it feels has been violated (something he has often talked about), they plan to sue for libel against those he considers to be publishing falsehoods. With all negative the stuff that has been posted all over the web about Rossi, they could be very busy if they are going to carry out this action to the maximum extent.

  • Pingback: E-Cat: gli avvocati di Rossi si preparano a difendere la fusione fredda | Informare per Resistere()

  • hydroman

    isn’t it libel to call someone a snake or a clown?
    Puppeteer is maybe ok.

  • Dave

    This last thing Rossi wants to do is file a civil lawsuit against anybody over his E-Cat. That would open him up to the discovery process. The truth is an absolute defense to any libel suit. All the defendant would have to do is file a motion asking the court to force Rossi to allow an independent 3rd party test of his E-Cat.

    Rossi, if your E-Cat wasn’t a scam/hoax you wouldn’t be worried about what people are saying about it on the Internet. You would be making billions of dollars from it right now. Where is the evidence that it works? There isn’t any because it doesn’t work. All of the evidence points to it being a fake.

    Do you want to sue me for saying this? Fine. Let me know and I’ll give you my name and address for the process server.

  • Leonard Stengel

    Mr Garino

    Any chance that you could make a more formal announcement on this? I think many here have been waiting for independent confirmation, or at least support, for the Hyperion, but unfortunately a post cannot be considered more than just a rumor.

    If you do not wish to involve mainstream media just yet, may I suggest getting in touch with Ruby Carat from

    Either way, thank you very much.

    • artefact

      Admin is doing it. One mail is enough.
      Just saying..

      • artefact

        ahh wrong reply button 😉

  • NH

    From the JOPN:

    Andrea Rossi
    March 28th, 2012 at 9:04 AM
    To the Readers:
    I received some worried comments from our Readers regarding the fact that the Patent Law in Italy demands that the object of the patent is manufactured and sold within 4 years from the application. We have totally no problem about this issue: we have already manufactured the E-Cats, and we have officially registered sales contracts, both things made well before such term, which would expire on April 9th. By the way, the law is different, as my Attorney explained well to me: what the law demands is not that the apparatus is manufactured ad sold, but that the apparatus has been actually made. Nevertheless, we manufactured, sold made .
    Warm Regards,

  • Francesco CH

    Very interesting things at the University of Bologna are going on…

    • Lu

      We’re all ears….

      • Francesco CH

        As I have already wrote:

        Krivit wrote that UNIBO terminated its relationship with Rossi, I said that it was not true, and I confirm it is not true. And you, too, are going to discover it is not true.

        • Francesco CH

          As I have already written… SORRY

          • Lu

            Thanks. Sounds like good news.

  • Kim

    Now we are going backwards (digressing) pushing

    into the realm of litigation, its non productive!

    Its reeks moral stagnation and all that is rotten
    in humanity.

    Its a sign of that ego is in control and no
    good will come of it.

    Do that which is proper for once!

    Andrea Rossi do the
    right thing…

    You will be remembered in
    history and be showered with things 1000′s
    of times better than money or pride.

    What the hell is it with Humanity???????????


  • Pimp

    Okay, since there has been some discussion about the nature of the libel and slander laws in these comments I would like to offer some quotations as evidence. From the Bolen Report:

    “Now it is time for a laugh at attorney Michael K. Botts, Esq’s response. Botts actually reverted back to a silly claim made by Barrett, and the National Council Against Health Fraud (NCAHF) in a series of cases in California where the NCAHF said that ‘You are guilty until you prove yourself innocent…’

    The Judge in one of those cases, the NCAHF v King Bio case, wrote ‘Furthermore, the Court notes that the logical end-point of Plaintiff’s burden-shifting argument would be to permit anyone with the requisite filing fee to walk into any court in any state in the Union and file a lawsuit against any business, casting the burden on that defendant to prove that it was not violating the law. Such an approach, this Court finds, would itself be unfair.'”

    Also, in a lawsuit against Stephen Barrett, who is associated with the same sleazy pseudoskeptic movement as Dickhead Smith, DDI lawyers filed papers with the court saying:

    “Mr. Botts was asked whether he really expected Mr. Levens to send him ‘proof that DDI did not commit fraud or conspire with nonstandard doctors to trick grieving parents into chelating their autistic children,’ as opposed to expecting Defendants to present proof that Plaintiff did. Mr. Botts, displaying no recognition of the FACT that THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THE DEFENSE in a case of slander, answered in the affirmative.”

    I added some emphasis. Here is the link:'s-Data-v-Barrett/settlementscreeching.htm

    Now, Tim Bolen, the guy who runs the Bolen Report, may not be a classically-trained lawyer, but it is his job to know about this sort of thing. I believe that Bolen is telling the truth about all of this, but if you people think that he is wrong then you are welcome to look up these legal documents yourselves and report any errors that you may find. I believe that, if these quotations are being reported properly (and I think that they are), the message is clear: the burden of proof is on the defense in libel cases.

    • sapain

      plaintiff vs defendant.
      judge-rules on weighed factual evidence that is presented.

      plaintiff always files first. ie. statement of claim.
      with filing, evidence of action is submitted, plaintiff is supplying proof and has meet burden of proof. without some sort of proof it will not make it to the court room.
      defendant receives notice by court and has a set time line to reply. defendant submits their defence to plaintiff`s claim and/or presents counterclaim/s.
      court sets date for hearing (forum) of evidence.
      judge listens to evidence, weighes the evidence and makes ruling.
      this is the bases of all legal forums.
      no one is filing actions against rossi.
      rossi is stating, going to file a claim against varies parties that have caused harm to him, and claimed what harms have been committed and who made (created) the harm.
      rossi`s statement has started the clock of statute of limitations, he verbally gave notice of intent to file.
      rossi now has to file in a limited time frame dependant on territory of court.
      rossi files a claim, in his claim he must submit all facts to the claim about the claim.
      rossi has to claim what was said, why it was said and show proof the statements and/or actions were wrong and the extent of the harm caused to him as evidence.
      rossi is obiligated to present all facts, pictures of maufacturing plant/s, dates and places of manufacturing, evidence of a working ecat, etc. (if it hits the court room he had better have a working ecat for the judge or jury), in his statement of claim.
      once in the court room, rossi has to also show proof that his actions did not contribute to the actions/harm against him. ie. he did not make conflicting statements about his ecat factory. those conflicting statements, plus other conflicting statements have given rise to the harm against him. in other words, was rossi responsible for the actions towards him and he, himself is the cause of the actions.

      the defendant just has to prove one (in this case there r multiple) inaccurate statement rossi made along with his past character to justify their actions against rossi and put the burden of responsibility on rossi.

      if the court finds rossi responsible for the actions against him then is claim will be dismissed whether or not he has a working ecat.
      in other words, u can`t keep pushing someone and not expect them to react. various parties have asked by various method to show proof, rossi has maintained secretcy, committed misstatements and other things, he alone is responsible for the actions.

      once an ecat is proven, any actions of harm against rossi after the proof of ecat will be successful in a law suit.

      anyone stating that the ecat is not true has claimed rossi a liar, calling someome who is promoting a thing a liar, is automatically claimed as committing fraud, whether stating the word fraud or not.

      • Pimp

        Yeah, I agree with most of what you put up there. I will agree that Rossi has to prove that certain factual statements were made that Rossi believes are not true – it should not be too difficult as these statements, themselves, do not seem to be in dispute. However, once those statements are proven to have been made then the burden lies on the people who made the statement of fraud to prove that the statement of fraud is accurate. I disagree that Rossi’s unwillingness to offer some kind of proof to the general public means that Rossi is responsible for other people calling him a fraud. As far as I know, his only responsibility to prove anything is to the people who are involved financially.

        • sapain

          u r subjecting two forums into one.
          accussation of fraud leading to libel, defimation of character etc.-civil.
          civil- seeking financial damage recovery.
          if in a court, if it is proven beyond reasonable doubt that rossi caused the action (accused of fraud), then rossi cannot gain or recover a loss or potential loss.

          if someone pushes another and another reacts back, another is not responsible since they acted in self preservation of self or mayb protecting others indirectly. had someone not pushed another, the action of another would not have happen, hence responsiblity of action.

          had rossi openly demoed the ecat instead of hiding and using mistruth, the accusations of fraud would not have happened.
          had rossi demoed the ecat and proven it so, any accussations of fraud after the fact would win with no contest.

          people accussing rossi of fraud r acting in self preservation and the preservation of others. people have asked politely of comfirmation and rossi refuses to give it and lied in the process.

          • Pimp

            I don’t know what to say other than I think that is a bad analogy. I will repeat that Rossi has no obligation to prove to you or anybody else (unless you’re financially involved) that the E-cat works. His unwillingness to prove that his E-cat works is not, all by itself, good evidence of fraud. Therefore, if you call him a fraud based on such reasoning and you hurt his reputation and cause him damages you are guilty of libel. In some countries and situations you would be guilty of libel even without hurting Rossi’s reputation or causing damages. If you believe that this is all false then I guess we will have to wait and see how it all plays out in court.

  • daniel maris

    From the Oracle:

    Dear Greg Leonard:
    My robotized line is already in construction, but not in operation.
    The 1 MW plants are made under a different concept, therefore the robotized line is not useful for them
    Thank you for your kind attention,
    Warm Regards,

    • jacob

      please AR don’t worry about the competition there
      will be enough for you to do .
      there will be already be much pressure from big oil
      energy to try to suppress this technology ,universities have gotten so much money from the
      Rockefeller foundation as endowment money ,the universities do not want to bite the hands that feed them ,the news networks hands are tied because they can not go against the accepted science,free energy was stopped a hundred years
      ago ,with drawing support from Nikola Tesla ,

      learn from history and support Defkalion by letting them do their own thing

      AR you still will be making enough money ,free
      energy belongs to each person on planet earth
      so please do not fight your fellow man .

      each and every person on this planet has the right
      to free energy technology

      I like you Mr Rossi ,keep up the good work

      • Kim

        Thanks for saying these words, I
        Hope Dr Andrea Rossi reads them.

        I’m Tired of all the silly games, its
        the same emotional B.S Money,Power,Control,
        Ego…. ad naseum…

        Mankind is left out and people are starving
        and holding their breath…

        Come Fourth with it, Andrea Rossi do the
        right thing… you will be remembered in
        history and be showered with things 1000’s
        of times better than money.


        • Rick


          This is ridiculous. Pleas to Mr Rossi? Not only is it absurd to believe he has anything substantial, but to believe that if he did he should not worry about making a killing off of it because “everyone on the planet has the right to free energy technology” ??

          I do not even mean to inflame but neither Rossi nor Defkalion have shown anything enough to move any logical observer from the position of having no reason to believe they have created commercial LENR. Pandering to Mr. Rossi seems naive and embarrassing.

          I pray I get sued for this so my Lawyer can get some work on his plate.

          G’Day Indeed

          • jacob

            rick don’t worry LENR works to well, thats all

  • Pingback: E-Cat: Andrea Rossi prepara querele contro i detrattori - Energia, Nucleare - GreenStyle()

  • Let one or two fully independant testing teams with one basic unit to test it “as they like” , signor Rossi.( if they promise not to open it, of course). It will be cheaper and more convincting !