>From Abd: ...
> No, not if they have been careful. Look, you pay to go see a famous > magician. He lies to you and diverts your attention, and you applaud. > Is that grounds for criminal action? Marketers lie about their > products all the time. Can you prosecute them for it? We applaud a famous magician because we willingly enter into an agreement to be fooled by such expert trickery. 'We willingly pay money because we EXPECT to be fooled and be delighted by such slight-of-hand. That is definitely not the case with Steorn. If it becomes obvious that Steorn attempted to fool its subscribers... I would imagine pitchforks and tar are in order, and a personal candygram from Mongo. > Depends, doesn't it? Puffery is not generally illegal. Fraud is. > Lying isn't fraud except under narrow circumstances. Indeed, it certainly does "depend." For me the ultimate question comes down to whether Steorn knowingly and willing knows or believes that their ORBO technology won't work as advertised - that it will NEVER work. My argument is that Storn at present continues to believe that their ORBO technology will ultimately work, if enough money can be thrown at it in order to resolve a few sticking points. Other's on this list, others who are far more knowledgeable than I on the matters of electromagnetism, are not so charitable on this matter. What do I know! It's possible that they may be right. I just still seems likely from my POV. > >I'm reminded of Deep Throat's advice: "Follow the money." And since we > >are trying to follow where the money might be coming from it seems to > >me that only the "true believers" who stand to be conned out of their > >money would be companies & corporations who end up purchasing licenses > >in the hopes of building their own energizer bunny. For the most part, > >the admiring and true-believing public are not in a position of being > >fleeced. > > Really? What's the disclosure price? It's within range for small > pockets. Some corporations might toss in what is to them pocket > change, just in case. All they have to do is keep it looking > interesting enough. I agree. But that's not the point I was trying to make. My point was that Mr. & Mrs. Jane & Joe Public are not the "entities" Steorn is going after. Steorn is mostly going after companies, enterprises, corporate entities (big or small) that might be interested. ... > > I'm more inclined > >to speculate that Stoern continues to envision becoming filthy rich > >from taking a tiny slice of all the profits from the licenses they > >hope to sell. > > I doubt it at this point. Maybe at one point, then as it dawned on > them that it wasn't going to, instead of wasting their momentum, they > figured out how to sell what they have really found. Interesting conjecture. In the course of time if that appears to be the case, Mongo will send candygram. Prosecutor: At what point did you consciously conclude that your contraption would not work as previously advertised. Defendant: I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that to answer it would incriminate me. Oh, wait a minute. This is Ireland! Do they have an equivalent of "Taking the fifth" in Ireland? Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
