Robert Leguillon <robert.leguil...@hotmail.com> wrote: Someone claiming to be Hank Mills chimed in on Rossi's JoNP webpage with: >
> . . . I think we should be skeptical of the claims of any company that > claims to have robust Ni-H systems, but do not utilize catalysts. > Mills is confused. Defkalion says they do utilize a catalyst. They say they discovered the catalyst independently. If there is no patent, it does not matter how they develop it, as long they did not nothing criminal such as stealing a sample, and nothing in violation of a contract (subject to a civil suit). Even if they got a sample and reverse engineered it that would be legal. Without a patent anyone can do that. With the patent, you do not need to do that. The patent itself should tell you everything you need to know. If it does not, it is not valid. Rossi believes he is capable of manufacturing so many machines that even if someone reverse engineers it they will not be able to compete. In the early 1980s, IBM casually released the specifications for its personal computer and threw open the market for "compatible" PCs. They did this because they thought that they had such enormous manufacturing capabilities and such a large market share they did not have to worry about other companies undercutting them in price. They were wrong, but it was a rational calculation. Rossi's use of the same strategy is not only wrong, it is a bit crazy. However smart he may be, he cannot compete in mass production with companies such as Hitachi or GE. I do not think he can form an ironclad partnership with a large manufacturer. Suppose he goes in business with GE for example. That might give GE a six-month advantage and a large starting market share, but the others would soon catch up. - Jed
