2012/2/16 Andre Blum <andre_vor...@blums.nl>: > > Nowhere does Rossi say the invoice is fabricated. He just says it is > 'unvalid', which apart from not entirely correct or usual English, is a bit > vague, and maybe intentionally so. (he might be conveniently hiding behind > his language barrier, here, knowing he gives the impression that it is > fabricated, but keeping options open in case more evidence pops up). > > My feeling is that the invoice is real. The rest of the message very much > acknowledges that he has indeed been selling commercial licenses bound to > territories, so I wouldn't know why the Byron New Energy Charity Trust > couldn't be one of them. [ Nor do I understand exactly why that would > incriminate Rossi much ]
Agreed. See this paragraph of Rossi's post; After the interested persons sign the agreement, we send an invoice, and the agreement is deemed valid only after the payment of the license fee is done within the term agreed. If the payment is not done, the agreement expires and that invoice for which the payment has not been made is compensated in the accounting by a credit memo. So basically he seems to be saying that invoice is 'unvalid' because Byron never paid him. Rob
