Rossi/Leonardo vs. Industrial Heat et al. (Update #3: Rossi Makes Statement on ‘Partial’ ERV Reports)

Since I am sure we will be spending a lot of time discussing this court case, I decided it might make sense to dedicate a permanent thread to news connected with the suit, and put it in a prominent spot on the website. So this thread will serve as a place to post updates and comments on it. The most recent posts will appear at the top.

Link to the case docket is here:

For reference, here is the license agreement between Leonardo and Industrial Heat:
Here is the link to Rossi’s court complaint:

UPDATE #3(May 1 2016)
On the Journal of Nuclear Physics, Andrea Rossi made a comment which provides more details than previously in connection with his complaint. Rossi was asked about guided tours that had been given to visitors at the plant. He responded:

Andrea Rossi
May 1, 2016 at 7:52 AM
We have the movies of them, because the plant had cameras for security issues, and photos, but all this information cannot be published before it is disclosed in Court.
I can make this statement, though: all I said in this blog about the 1 year test of the 1 MW E-Cat will be sustained by undisputable evidence in Court.
I say this now: all the main investors that gave real money to IH before IH bought other IP around have repeatedly visited our plant. I can also add this, because it is already public: the ERV made a partial report every 3 months and the results were the same as in the final report. This means that IH received a report in April, a second report in July, a third report in October, before the final report. The results of all these reports were the same, moreless. IH not only never criticized the reports, but shown the reports to Woodford and in an official conference in China, using them to collect investments. The comments of Darden about the reports can be read in his interviews after the Chinese conference.
So, for one year of test IH accepted with great enthusiasm the reports, used them to get enormous investments from funds and never made a single communication to the ERV, who sent to them all the preliminar reports, not a single word in negative.

The situation changed as soon as payment time came.
Warm Regards,

UPDATE #2 Some more items have been added to the court docket. Now Industrial Heat et al have until June 12th to file responses to the complaint.

UPDATE #1 (April 18, 2016) Here’s the first contribution to the thread.

This link shows that Industrial Heat is useing the Jones Day law firm:

Jones Day is a worldwide firm and according to Wikipedia, one of the top 10 largest law firms in the world, and the largest law firm in the United States.

  • Gerald

    Pacerdocket is just updated 2 hours ago with what seams a lot of new documents. First have to work, hope to read a next chapter with a smile? Tonight..

    • Gerard McEk

      Gerald, I am not following this so closely, but you seem to do that. Any idea when the trial will take place?

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    I was reading about shell companies and corruption in relation to another situation and then I remembered the shell companies used by IH and at the time wondering why would they do that?

  • sam
  • IH have the money if the test is positive.
    They have half the money from Woodford, more from others, could just have paid 10Mn$ saying they are short, or borrow more to a bank or to an investor…

    now the test may even be positive, that is not the problem.
    IH clearlycannot replicate the claim in a way that give him hope to develop a reactor themselves.

    Note that sharing with Brillouin is not only not proven, but also not a violation of the agreement.
    IH just have to pay the license, which is cheap compared to the expected benefits (billions).
    Mixing IP, provided to respect royalties, is normal. note also that of course IH have acces, not property, to E-cat X, to Quark, if they exist… of course because V1.0 of a technology is without any value if V2.0 is developped, and the contract anticipated that.

    I see many option :
    – rossi have nothing usable, like Defkalion
    – rossi is so paranoid he faked the test, and kept tradesecrets (absurd)
    – rossi try to find a way to break the contract like with Defkalion, with Prometeon, … to get a better check elsewhere. (or to hide 1)

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    I guess I am just too old, I cannot get over how the world’s public is starting to accept corporate greed and stealing as the norm. Darden and IH have created NOTHING, they are simply trying to high jack, steal, Rossi IP.

  • Oystein Lande

    Do anyone understand why Jed Rothwell is so angry, using on the border of uprofessional words and phrases wrt Penon as the ERV?

    Only IH and Rossi has yet recieved and read the ERV report, so why is he so premature dismissive ?

    I mean, measuring and calculating heating of a water stream is one of the simpler calculation that any nuclear, HVAC or chemical process engineer should be competent of doing. I would be surprised If Penon missed any measurements.

    • There is a simple and evident answer.
      Jed , like for Defkalion, is devastated by the consequence of that on the image of LENR in the public and decision maker circles.

      Jed devoted much energy to make LENr real, to help research be funded so application emerge and many problem are solved.

      He also have observed the damages of the image of Fraud that sticks to cold fusion.

      He have seen data, have crossed claims, and feel devastated, AGAIN.

      maybe like me he is tired. more than me, because he have seen that more often than me, and because he don’t know what I know.

      I’m optimistic because I know IH is still credible for those who fund LENR, and that nobody needs Rossi.
      the domain needs investors, and Rossi just raised the interest on good LENR experimental results, good startups.

      I don’t know what exactly Rossi screwed up, and why…
      I’ve been told he just keep secrets, breaking the agreement with IH.
      Jed says the 1MW test is bunk…
      I wonder if any E-cat even worked, if any ever had a COP>6, and if any other than Rossi could make it that way…Finally I don’t care.

      as soon as few millions irrigate the domain, with serious engineers helping serious researchers, things will go fast, and the one who like Rossi keep his secrets, will just be ignored.

      I suspect it is happening, and guess what, IH is not the heart of it, and Rossi of course will be ignored.
      Even if his technology is good, his behavior show you cannot work with him.

      Better work with someone serious that will share something after hard work, than someone with technology that will never share sincerely.

      • Oystein Lande

        I fully agree.

        There exists creative inventors, smart investors and energetic, intelligent entrepenours able to build strong companies. But very seldom you find all of these in one single person, like Elon Musk.

        Rossi is possible a creative inventor, but has not yet proven to have adequat skills as entrepeneur. One important skill as entrepeneur is the ability to trust and cooperate with other people and partners. Rossis behaviour have indicated more of the typical inventor – “I trust no one”, and therefore can be very difficult to work with and have business arrangements with….

        But time will show where this ends then….

        • you raise the key point.

          I have echo from people who can do it.

          Rossi’s behavior as they understand from far make him without any value.

          entrepreneurship is taking risk, and one big risk is trusting.

          IH took the risk, now they limit the risk.

          they did not lose 11Mn, they did not save 89M$, they have lost 1Bn$ by not building E-cat as expected.
          you don’t lose 1Bn$ if you have choice.

          • DrD

            As you say, maybe they didn’t have a choice.
            Maybe they just didn’t have the $89M.

            • they have the money, and with a good report and evidence of replications they can even borrow the cash overnight at less than 10%/y

              My conviction is that they are forced not to pay, because if they do they will be sued for bad due diligence and irresponsible behavior.

              note that the result of the test have no more importance than giving impression.
              they key is , as written in Mats blog, to obtain a solid evidence over small power that E-cat works (100W with good calorimetry).

              if confirmed, and added to many cased were this rational test was proposed and rejected by rossi, I will have no other choice than to say that e-cat probably don’t work.

              anyway, what is important is if the know-how is transferred to IH.
              if IH cannot make an E-cat that works as Rossi claims, the agreement is void.

              today the best information I have is the IP is not transferred, and the test is positive.

              I’m surprised and very concerned by precise claims of some people that the reactor did not produce 1MW at all.

              that E-cat is void make that story absurd, but who knows. maybe we miss some points.

              • BillH

                One might think that a failure of the 1MW plant to operate at all would have been spotted in the very early days of the test. If a test can run for 1 year with no suspicion of trickery till the very late stages, or ever, you would have to conclude that IH’s staff were very lax in their monitoring of the situation. Who’s fooling who?

                • What if IH have spotted problems, as Dewey and Jed say ?
                  Who said to you the test was OK ?

                  As I say, as long as you estimate you have a contract with the Golden Egg Diva, you accept her strange demands and swallow your pride.

                  When you suspect there is no egg at all… only suspect… you start to talk, in private, kindly not to worry your diva…

                • BillH

                  Then they would have stopped the test, week 1 or month 1. They must have had encouraging signs that the test was working in the first few days, otherwise why continue. If IH were not monitoring this test very carefully, or saw nothing, then the fault clearly lies with them.

                • First, maybe the report were per quarter only (I’ve heard that… IH was not so happy but accepted).
                  second is that when you see bad point, you first contact your diva and ask explanations…
                  if he gives excuses you wait for improvement.
                  when the improvement don’t come you bark louder in private… but stay quiet in public not to hurt the diva.
                  you hear many excuses, justifications, promises, like we all hear on JoNP.

                  My feeling is that me, like IH, have tolerated too much, too long.
                  We all know LENr is real, and we all know that Rossi is strange diva and that if we make him unhappy he will go balistic and we may lose the opportunity of the century…
                  Only whene we are absolutely sure to have been fooled do we start to bark and bite.
                  Note that IH did not bark, they just refused to pay in private. It is rossi who barked.

                  IH may still have some hope it may be real, and that they just were victim of paranoid tactics of the Diva.

        • DrD

          Rossi is accused of being slow and not an entrepeneur and yet he seems to be leading the pack.

          No one else is predicting mass production.
          Maybe he’s illusional but as you say, time will show; 12 months should be enough.

          • I remember in january 2011, I thought 3 months would be enough. At the time Rossi promised to have a product on the market within 3 months. Here we are 5 years later, and still no end in sight. Of course I hope Rossi has what he says he has, but we don’t know that. And I am afraid that we won’t be any closer to an answer in another 12 months. I guess we’ll see. At least we can enjoy the e-Cat drama(it should be a TV series).

      • Warthog

        Jed says he got his info from Rossi. Why does Jed think that said data is “right”, and actually reflects the real performance of the E-cat.

        According to Jed’s own multiple statements, Rossi is extremely devious in his business dealings, and proud of being so.

        Can you imagine a more effective way for Rossi to mislead his competition than to feed Jed data that indicates a seriously flawed ERV??? While himself continuing to make comments reflecting the real data??

        • Engineer48

          Hi Warthog,

          Jed said he got his data from IH by just asking for it. Further he said the data was Rossi data and Rossi would be very upset if Rossi knew how he had obtained it.

          Rossi did say he purchased and installed exactly the same system as the ERV installed and that the 2 system’s data matched to the accuracy of the instruments.

          So there are 2 data streams in existence. If IH has a copy of the data recorded by Rossi’s system, then maybe that is what IH gave Jed and as such still obeyed the NDA requiring both IH and Rossi to agree to ERV data disclosure.

          • Warthog

            There is some confusion here, as I am sure that I have elsewhere seen Jed say he got the data directly from Rossi, not IH.

            Note…not discounting your comment. There are just a lot of mutually contradictory comments floating around.

            • Engineer48

              Hi Warthog.

              He said it was Rossi data and that Rossi would be very upset if he knew how he had obtained it.

              Jed then said he received the data from IH, which means it is not ERV data as IH needs Rossi’s OK to release ERV data.

              Conclusion is IH gave Jed the data from Rossi’s monitoring system, which then fits what Jed has said.

              • Warthog

                “He said it was Rossi data and that Rossi would be very upset if he knew how he had obtained it.

                And that fact is exactly what makes me skeptical. I’ve followed LENR and thus necessarily, Jed, since he first appeared on the scene, and he has ALWAYS bent over backwards to avoid even the slightest whiff of improper behavior.

                Doing what you say he did would be the equivalent of receiving stolen goods, and I just can’t see him making that choice.

                Receiving it directly from Rossi under NDA would be perfectly legit, as it is Rossi’s technology.

                It just doesn’t “jibe” with the Jed Rothwell whose commentaries I have followed over the years.

                • Engineer48

                  Hi Warthog,

                  What I told you was what Jed told me on ECW. He even boasted Rossi would be very upset if Rossi khew how he had obtained Rossi’s data.

                  All in the public record.

                • Warthog

                  Incredible! Once upon a time, I greatly admired Mr. Rothwell for his evenhandedness. Apparently he has turned his back on that. Shame on him!

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    Guest…..I was a financial controller for a construction company, so please do not try to educate me on the purposes and abuses of shell corporations, and the reason you give “LLC” is a joke.

  • Bernie Koppenhofer
  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    You can’t be serious, comparing a real estate corporation not associated to LENR to setting up shell companies for various parts of a single agreement.

  • guitarwebs

    I personally believe that there are some decent 10 percenters, however, the1 percenters call the shots. Sadley, i believe we are greatly outnumbered by the ultimate capitalists. I do believe they ( the 10 percenters) do fear a global revolution of epic proportions in the not too distant future. So they toy with the idea of basic incomes. Payola for the masses so to speak.

    Just saying

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    Who paid Penon, was he paid monthly, quarterly, and who paid him? You do not pay someone if you are not satisfied with his work.

    • Ged

      IH and Leonardo Corp both paid him in equal parts. Not sure how often, but usually in the US salary pay is once per month, so probably that is how it was.

      • Bernie Koppenhofer

        I know the contract says both will pay him, but do we have proof IH actually paid Penon for a report? Why would they pay for a report they think is not accurate and possibly fraudulent? If they did pay their argument for not paying Rossi becomes weaker. But, of course their game is delay, delay and settle in a few years.

        • Ged

          I doubt he would have stayed around if he wasn’t receiving his paycheck (no one would). But we’ll see what IH turns up.

  • LCD

    “Unsuccessful”, the word used by IH is not very descriptive.

  • Added some thoughts on Weaver ranting on lenr-forum. Especially his arguments about ERV/Penon is really strange.

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      I warned Rossi he was up against the best propagandist machine in the world and we can expect the same from the legal side. There are at least 10 working “PR” propagandists working at various LENR sites. Do not under estimate their power just look what happened to Flecishman and Pons, they were driven out of their countries. Rossi should expend all his energy and money installing as many E-Cats in as many customer factories as fast as he can. But no, he is spending all his energy and money to have another “test” that will be discredited.

      • I’m not sure. Rossi strategy of working below the radar with selected people/customers might be better than we think, since the IH PR machine is fueled by ad-hominem, removing the hominem is not that bad. I believe working with customers/trusted people is what is going on right now.

  • What I don’t get is IH paid half for the ERV. Rossi can make all the claims he wants because a system was set up to verify results. Seems the real question is the reliability of Fabio Penon. Seems his reputation is more at stake.

    • Andrew

      “Because a system was set up to verify results”

      Link/source please!

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      This brings up a point I have not heard anything about. Was Penon paid, monthly, quarterly? And who paid him?

      • Ged

        Barry’s post answered your last question… As does the contract agreement between IH and Rossi which was published in the court documents. Who paid him is not a mystery, thankfully.

  • Jerry Soloman

    Darden and his attornies will do everything to make sure the case is heard in North Carolina where the good ole boy network is alive and well,

    They will force Rossi attoneires to attend court dates in North Carolina this will go on for years and years.

    The IH strategy will be to drag this out then make a settlement yet continue to develop Rossi’s IP.

    • LCD

      It is not the MO of Darden and Vaugn to screw inventors/entreprenuers. You have to wonder what is really going on.

  • Andrew

    Right in the most recent quote from JONP

  • SG

    It will come down to a contest of who breached first.

  • clovis ray

    Billh, you couldn’t be more wrong, on all points, wow buddy did you get up on the wrong side of your bed as well.
    1.what do you call customer #1, that demanded his plant be replaced, and ordered 3 more. you must have forgotten about that one,it’s still making customer#1 lots of money.
    2.there is no proof that the plant worked intermittently and the test was not unreliable, it was very reliable, and ran most of the time in ssm, with NO attention by anybody except the ERV, costing nothing,
    3. Bill leo corp, will have no more dealings with I/H , including the 89 mill. they I/H broke their agreement, and that ended that, i/p included, and btw an agreement is not a sales agreement unless stated, and not sure of that one.
    Giving the money back are you kidding., that would be admitting guilt. and their reputation is caput, I believe no reputable business will have anything to do with them.

    your whole comment was , just not believable, to me

  • adriano

    There are two main point to consider. The first one is the scientific side of the story where both parties will present their own data with their own expert, but on this side I think Rossi have a disadvantage since I dont think you will ever find a court that will take the responsability to certificate that a device that defeat the known laws of physics exist. The second point is IH and Darden behavior. We dont know their version of events but if their conductions will seem to be at least difficult to understand for an avarage observer (like it is decribed by Rossi) then this will defenetly give to Rossi’s words more importance then words from Darden.

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    It is my opinion, from Rossi statements, the fact that IH started investing in other LENR companies was the last straw, Rossi realized they were going to use these investments as cover for creating their own IP and a full assault on Rossi worldwide IP and business.

    • Pweet

      I don’t see why the investment by IH in other LENR companies should now be reported as a surprise to anyone, including Rossi. Tom Darden clearly stated in one of his very few earlier interviews that IH had invested in a number of LENR projects and Rossi’s ecat was just one of them.
      It was in this same interview that he said he didn’t find Rossi to be a very credible person. Although in the same interview he also said he would continue to support his work and that IH was in it for the long haul.
      But it was plain from what he said he was not limiting his investments in LENR to the ecat only. That fact didn’t seem to bother anyone then. It seemed to be a wise strategy; something to do with eggs and baskets I think, but in this case, had IH looked at the eggs more closely I think they would have noticed they had a distinct bluish tinge and a smell of sulfur dioxide emanating from them.

      I’m wondering if when he said he didn’t find Rossi to be a credible person if he hadn’t already found there was a serious discrepancy between what Rossi claimed and what IH was able to substantiate, to use the exact word IH used.
      It’s still more than a bit suspect that they went on after that to offload their liability onto some other gullible fools. Not only that but to make a big profit on it, if what Rossi says is true. (gee, that’s a big ‘if’ though isn’t it?)
      I suppose they saw it as just good business. I see it as crooked and immoral, so it’s hard to have sympathy for either side in this current dispute.

      • Pweet

        oops, I mean a smell of hydrogen sulphide, not sulphur dioxide. Big difference in aroma.
        Sorry people. Just a slip of the nose hairs.
        I don’t know why these errors are invisible until after I post them, and I can’t edit it out.

      • Engineer48

        I’m not a lawyer but my read of the contract between IH and Leonardo has a Non Compete clause that requires IH to not invest in, or engage with or share IP with any competitor of Leonardo.

        From Darden’s own comments it would seem the Non Compete conditions of the contract may have been ignored by IH, which would put them in Default and remove any rights they had to the shared IP and requires them to not engage in any LENR activity with any entity.

        When I read the contract and remember what Darden had said, well I was amazed as clearly Darden had decided to operate as if the contract was not binding on IH.

        • Brent Buckner

          The non-compete in Section 13.3 enjoins Rossi/LC to not compete with IH, not the other way around, as long as IH is not in breach of the License Agreement (at which time it enjoins IH to not compete with Rossi/LC).

          • Engineer48


            Clause 1 clearly states IH has no right deal with the licensed IP but can deal in any way with the manufactured product. While it can offer sublicenses, they can only be sublicenses of its rights to use the licensed IP.

            It seems IH has no rights to share or deal with the licensed IP. Would seem that to do so would be a breach of the Clause 1 conditions under which the licensed IP can be used.

            Very interesting Clause 1 mentions Military uses in Italy (is that where the 1st 1MW plant went?)

            Also as Clause 3.1 has not been met, payment of $100.5m, IH would seem to have no license to use the Leonardo/Rossi IP.

      • Stephen

        Hi Pweet, I don’t want to drag up old grounds from before I started to follow this story but for my information can you show me the link to the where Darden said Rossi was not credible? Just the link will do I don’t really want it to develop into an off topic conversation.

        By the way incase it helps I believe you can edit your comments if you sign in via Discus.

      • Curbina

        The only time ever that someone quoted Darden saying Rossi was not credible was when some creep denounced Rossi and IH of having a nuclear reactor and folks of some goverment agency went To a IH facility and talked with Darden / Vaughn ant they later wrote a report in which the quote appears, that was known through, but those words, AFAIK, were never said by Darden/Vaughn directly y in a published interview.

      • Bernie Koppenhofer

        Hi Could you give me the source of this statement. Thanks. “It was in this same interview that he said he (Darden) didn’t find Rossi to be a very credible person” I do not remember Darden saying this in any of his interviews.

        • Omega Z

          I believe it was JT Vaughn who made that statement when the regulator was looking for Rossi workshop in Carolina.

          • Bernie Koppenhofer

            Thanks, now I remember, I took that comment as a way to get rid of inspector.

  • Eyedoc

    Just to clarify , is your registered name ‘Guest’? ? or you just posting as a guest of the site.

  • roseland67

    Not sure if politicians really want LENR to become public knowledge, if it does, you can be sure it will be spoonfed to the populous in little bits and pieces and parts so they can make $$$ on existing energy markets, shorts, longs etc.
    Make no mistake, IF, LENR is proven to be what we have been told it is, politicians already know about it.

    Conspiracy theorists unite

    • SG

      I think you might give too much credit to politicians. While surely a few will be aware, most are dialing for dollars the majority of their days.

    • Logical extrapolation of established corporate business practices isn’t ‘conspiracy theory’. Most politicians just do as they are told by their personal or party sponsors, and media editors do as they are told by the owners of their publications or other news channels, so its the bankers and the energy cartels who will ultimately call the tune.

  • Appleby

    I’m not sure where to post this but I have had my Twitter account hacked (after 1 day of activating…..mssg to Rachel maddow about LENR ) and now this.

    Can someone try and contact any media or government and see if they get the same results?

    • Argon

      This seems to have gone unnoticed by readers of this site. I don’t know much about this, but could try to put up discussion here. My take:
      – I don’t know much about practices with persons mentioned, but could guess you can’t get contact on them directly. They are probably so busy that they have assistants or advisors who filter interesting ones from the message flood.
      – Other question is should these topics be raised to politicians at this moment. Some say that it would be path to wrong fuss and failure.
      – There are ways ensure ‘your mouth is not shut’, but I’d rather first like to see discussion here what is opinions of other readers. My opinion is: “I’d rather wait and see how court case and possible other activities evolves in coming months.”

      BTW. Can you give more info what do you mean your twitter was hacked. DId hackers change password to lock you out?, or did they send tweets on your behalf? and so on. (I found your only 2 tweets from 2012?)

      • Andrew

        For politicians it’s better to keep their mouths shut and have people think they’re fools, then open them and remove all doubt.

      • Appleby

        Could you please make your information public so I know who I’m talking to?

        • Argon

          Yes that quote is automatically generated by Disqus, I cannot affect on it. That message could be more polite also in my opinion 🙂

          Unfortunately I am using pseudonym, and not planning to write here with my own name. Actually it wouldn’t matter to any of you since nobody here would know me any way.

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    I do believe Rossi held back some portion of his IP and did outsmarted IH. Going forward IH has hired the best and largest public relations firm and the largest and best law firm, they are going to be ready for battle the next time around and will use anything and do anything to control LENR. Rossi must get his E-Cat into the market place, yesterday.

    • Mike Henderson

      >Rossi held back some portion of his IP

      If he did, then he acted in bad faith and is going to have a rough time with the judge.

      Another possibility. I have been wondering if the trigger or control mechanism cannot be protected by anything more binding than secrecy. Or worse, it may be covered by someone else’s patent. What good is it to license intellectual property if it cannot be defended or if it requires licensing someone else’s IP?

      • Bernie Koppenhofer

        Trial by jury

      • Engineer48

        I do believe Rossi complied with the terms of the agreement and supplied full IP to IH.

        Proof is the 2 x 1MW plants that were manufactured by IH, the fuel formulated and loaded by IH and the control systems necessary to support and control SSM were incorporated into the 1MW plant build.

        IE. SSM could not have happened unless the fuel IH loaded and the control systems designed into the 1MW plant could support it.

        This is VERY IMPORTANT to understand.

        It is like saying Rossi withheld the IP for a mobile phone to attach to the internet and then Rossi waved a magic wand over the phone that did not have internet support physically built in and magically it had internet support.

        There are hardware control systems necessary to make SSM mode work. Too little heat feedback and it stops, too much and it goes into thermal runaway. So not something that can be simply added to the fuel. SSM support needs to be designed into the plant, which shows IH had the knowledge (IP) to design in SSM and to control it.

        What I did read was nckhawk saying he considered the IH/Rossi contract was finalised by the payment of the $11.5m. Reading into that you could see that IH believed it had nothing to gain and $89m to lose by paying Rossi the final payment.

    • Observer

      Odds are, what IP Rossi did not share with IH was still in development. (E-Cat Quark X)
      The failure to pay as contracted, suspended all future IP transfer.

      • Engineer48

        I’m not a lawyer. My reading of the contract suggests IH may have created a Default as soon as they invested in another LENR entity or shared Leonardo IP with another LENR entity.

        • LCD

          Was it IH that invested or Cherokee?

          Also does anybody know if the contract had a future IP rights clause for a certain time frame.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        That would reconcile with AR’s repetitive statements according to which the QuarkX is still under R&D.

  • passerby

    That seems like an awful lot of mental gymnastics to morally justify a company patenting something they did not invent. IH could theoretically use said patent to prevent the inventor from selling his own invention without paying them first. That is not right no matter how you spin it.

    Maybe you could chalk it up to a broken IP system enabling such behavior but I think it says a lot about the company’s supposed credibility that they would do that. Even if that is business as usual that does not make it any less dishonest.

    • bob

      I am an engineer by trade. I have have worked for 4 companies in my 30+ years. Everyone of them had an employment contract stating that they owned all rights to any invention I may create, even on my own time. It is not an unusual situation. It may be immoral in people’s opinion, but it can be legal. The law has little to do with morals.

      • passerby

        That contract does not apply to something you invented before your employment began, so it is not at all the same thing. They patented the e-cat after licensing it from them, years after he invented it.

        Pretty sketchy how you avoided mentioning that. Do you really want to be the kind of person that cares more about promoting a viewpoint than being honest?