>From James, > An executive has fiduciary responsibility to his stockholders. >This means he must pursue due diligence regarding the protection > of the assets of the company. Since the USPTO has made the > patentability status of "cold fusion" claims unclear, for Rossi to > expose his trade secret in a patent disclosure could be viewed > as a breach of fiduciary responsibility. > > Snipers who aren't under this sort of responsibility who demand > that Rossi trust the USPTO to act in a rational manner are not > to be taken seriously.
Daniel, I know you've already said that you've said everything you want to say on this topic, but do you have anything more you might like to add to Jame's commentary? I seem to recall that you have some first-hand knowledge of how a patent office works. As for me, INAL either, but I would speculate that Rossi's current patent would be defined by a gaggle of lawyers as having been written so badly that it would offer little or no protection against all forms of "illegal" attempts to reverse engineer the Andrea's work. James, you seem to be saying that under the current climate Rossi is in a catch-22 situation. Damned if he does. Damned if he doesn't. Did I miss something here? Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
