Rossi: Industrial Heat Offers to Sell Back License to Leonardo Corp.

Today on the Journal of Nuclear Physics Andrea Rossi made this statement:

Andrea Rossi
June 23, 2016 at 5:05 PM
Ruby Shale:
As usually, the guys of Industrial Heat are ready to sell what they do not own: now they are offering us to buy back our license, the license that they do not have anymore ( see the press release made few weeks ago from our Attorney John Annesser). I wonder if they will try to sell the Colosseum of Rome as well.
IH has no more any license related to out IP and whomever is interested to us in North America, Central America, South America, Russia, China, Saudi Arabia and Emirates must contact exclusively:
http://www.leonardocorporation.com
[email protected]
I have received other comments asking me what I think of the proposal made today by IH and this comments answers to all the others. I will not comment further issues to be discussed in Court.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

So apparently Industrial Heat has contacted Rossi’s camp and said they are willing to sell back the license that Rossi granted them in the original agreement. We don’t know what they are asking, but I would assume it would be for at least the $11.5 million they have already paid Rossi. If IH is willing to sell back the license, it could signal that they are ready to move on from the E-Cat. However it does not sound from this like Rossi is interested in paying for the license, as from his perspective it is now void.

And Rossi now declares Leonardo is open to do business in all the world, including those parts of the world which were in the IH territory. I do wonder, however, how willing people will be to enter into business agreements with Leonardo Corp while the legal action is underway. Perhaps Leonardo paying for a clean break from IH would be worth it in the long run if that would mean all legal disputations would be over, and Leonardo would be able to operate without the cloud of the lawsuit hanging over them.

  • Gunnar Lindberg

    ​With a working e-cat the licenses would be worth billions. Rossi would accept the offer (if genuine) and avoid future litigation.

    • He may wish to bankrupt IH in order to prevent them coming out with a competing product (based on ‘acquired’ IP) in the future.

      • Ophelia Rump

        You cannot bankrupt Cherokee, they are an investment fund. They can float more shell corporations than you could shoot in a boardwalk shooting gallery.

        • I said ‘IH’, not Cherokee. IH is the signatory to the agreement with Leonardo, and if it (as a shell co. with limited resources) can be bankrupted, this will terminate any claim that Darden/Cherokee might claim to have on LENR IP.

          • Guest

            Please provide proof I.H has made such an offer.
            Than we can discuss the offer.

            Until then, this is only noise and a continuously epicly failing PR strategy.
            Don’t take the bait.

          • I have no idea whether the reported ‘offer’ is real or otherwise, and I don’t think my comments on this thread suggest otherwise, so your request that I provide proof is slightly mystifying.

          • Guest

            1: Merely a friendly request, not an ultimatum
            2: I agree with you

          • Ged

            He’s suing for 89 mil. If he does have the goods, he’s fine. Otherwise IH will counter for fraud for a whole lot more money and criminal charges. Can’t do what you are suggesting, but recall he did pass all contract obligations, IH broke contract and thus forfeited their money. The court will decide if that is true or not.

          • giovanniontheweb

            IH trying to sell its licence back do not sound like someone claiming victim of fraud does it ?

          • Ged

            IH isn’t, it was a random forum user ranting and then turning to violent threats, claiming to be an IH shareholder. Guest below gives a good breakdown of the silliness.

          • Kevmo

            IH will counter with criminal charges? Are they suddenly a police force?
            The ERV was the contractual agreement as to whether or not Rossi had the goods. As you say, Rossi passed all contract obligations, including having and delivering the goods as well as an independent ERV report completed by a person of IH’s choosing. IH just doesn’t want to pay because they don’t know how to get this contraption up & running. That part of it was not in the contract, to their loss.

          • Albert D. Kallal

            Actually, if IH does have a position of fraud, then they have 1 year from the time of “realizing” that fraud to file a claim. Of course, this time frame can be extended indefinitely if the two parties are negotiating a deal and agree to “push” the threat of charges into the future. So often such positions are used as leverage between the lawyers.

            And as pointed out IH may not well be claiming fraud, but that they don’t agree with the ERV report based on methodology or other reasons that in their view does not “substantiate” the performance of the e-cat. We don’t know if IH has a position of fraud at this point in time. At this point, their positon “looks” like they simply don’t agree with the ERV report. As to if this position of doubt gets IH off the hook is another matter.

            Regards,
            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • Kevmo

            they have 1 year from the time of “realizing” that fraud to file a claim
            *** Then we very well may see Jed testifying in court as to when IH started whispering to him. I’ll bet it was prior to August of last year, and so they only have maybe 3 months to file their claim.

          • Albert D. Kallal

            Well, as noted, they can file the claim OR they can inform the other party and negotiate between each other (usually their lawyers – it called litigation!).

            So as noted, often a party will state we will not file changes if you agree to such and such (it used as a negotiating position). So the deadline can by this process be extended near indefinitely (assuming parties agree), and such negotiations are not subject to any public court filings. So this process could be occurring already.

            Regards,
            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • Frank Acland

            As with many other posts on this site, I have reported on something that Rossi says. I hope readers are able to see that this does not necessarily mean endorsement of what he says. Readers must decide for themselves, and your ‘wait and see’ approach is very understandable.

          • Andy Kumar

            Frank,
            Argon has a point. I appreciate your dedication to what you believe in. But you are ALWAYS so reverential to Rossi-says. When Rossi said that the Quark can generate heat, electricity and light at the same time, I would have preferred a little editorial raised-eyebrow from you.
            .
            It is your responsibility to steer your flock to reality. We knew the game is over when a Republican Senator stood up on the floor of the Senate to speak against Nixon and when a Democratic Senator did the same for Clinton.

          • Omega Z

            A device that produces heat, light and electricity simultaneously isn’t so amazing. I can do this myself.

            The question should be about energy in verses energy out or COP>1… That I can’t do.

          • Engineer48

            Hi Andy, who wrote:
            “When Rossi said that the Quark can generate heat, electricity and light at the same time, I would have preferred a little editorial raised-eyebrow from you.”

            If the QuarkX reactor’s prime energy output is photons, which can be either thermalised to produce heat or to produce electricity, where is the issue?

          • psi2u2

            Well said, my feelings exactly, except maybe I a reserve some judgment on IH, but based on what they have so far shown I would agree even with that; they have some serious convincing to do at this point, more than Rossi does.

          • Kevmo

            I agree that the process could be occurring but I doubt there’s any written evidence, it’s probably all verbal and deniable. That is, until Jed started writing his stuff here.

          • Ged

            Fraud at this level of money is criminal, in particular a white collar crime.

          • Kevmo

            Fraud is awfully hard to prove when your own unbiased tester produces a positive ERV report.

          • Omega Z

            Keep in mind this is Venture Capital. Interpretation- High Risk…

            A Fraud claim by IH would be very difficult as they based their decisions on external opinions. Not on Rossi says.

            A Fraud claim by Rossi would also be very difficult. Without a paper trail, your claiming to be able to read someones mind or train of thought that they never intended to pay.

            Breach of contract is much easier for a jury to decide. The evidence can be more easily interpreted by the jury.

          • Omega Z

            12 months later times 3.(2013)

            Note Rossi had previously offered to buy back the License and Industrial heat rebuffed Rossi’s offer. As in they wanted to keep the IP…

          • Kevmo

            Is that admissible in court? IH wanted to keep the IP but are claiming it’s unsubstantiated, even though their own guy wrote a report substantiating it. Their position gets worth with each pass I take at the data.

          • Omega Z

            It could be admissible as a statement from Rossi(1st person) but IH could deny it as well in court. Wonder if it was proposed on paper?

    • Guest

      No – If I.H steals the IP the licenses would be worth less or nothing.

      The offer was not genuine and it only included one plant and the right to sell to half the world.

      They try to take over the IP and if successful they can possible sell to the whole world, or not sell at all.

      Remember, even if they had the rights to sell e-cats to half the world, they might not do so in favour of for example carbon / palladium technology.

  • LilyLover

    Since Rossi talked about IH wanting to sell Coliseum, it’s clear that he’d not buy anything back at any meaningful price.
    Since Rossi’s got the goods, IH is willing to sell back, to avoid any future besmirching of the Cherokee brand-its.

    • Guest

      No – the offer was not serious at all. It was the rant of one very unstable person.
      At least that is my understanding.

  • Gerard McEk

    Things are getting more complicated. AR has indeed forbidden IH to use his IP for LENR products. I am sure IH will not agree with that. That may lead to another suit case from IH to Leonardo comp. This request to settle of IH will be the first step. Only legal companies will profit.

    • Rossi have made nothing.
      He claimed to have revoked the license, but contract is still valid since IH paid the 11.5Mn$.
      He have to deliver the technology to IH, and IH say he delivered nothing.
      The court battle will only be around that IP transfer and the 11.5Mn$.
      the 1MW test is not so important… IH would have paid even if the 1MW would have paid even if the 1MW test would have failed miserably, provided thay have interesting results in their lab.

      Visibly IH just want to close the dead end quickly, avoiding to damage other LENr researshers as it is happening.

      This affair have probably damaged sincere LENR efforts near me, and I’m in bad mood.
      Someone have to be hanged by his balls, court will decide who.
      I’m not the kind to lynch without a trial, even when evidences are clear.

      • Gerard McEk

        Hi Alain, how do you know who speaks the truth? What you are saying is the claim of IH. But would they have payed 11.5M if it would not work? That seems all very unlikely te me. But as you say, let the judge decide, but how he could that be done?
        I am sure that IH will be able to find enough scientists who would dismiss LENR based on theoretical grounds, but that would be against their strategy, having acquired a considerable group of LENR scientists. Then only a new test of an E-cat constructed by them and checked by Rossi would seem a way out…

        • read the story of dewey and jed… it is coherent.

          a VC would pay 10Mn for a chance to test that technology, but no more if it does not work.

          This is risk taking, but risk taling happen only when there is uncertainty. When things are sure bad, you stop paying.

          IH would be happy if it worked, and 100Mn is cheap just for US only market.
          If E-cat is real, the only rational possibility is that Rossi want to obtain a better price by renegociating or changing partner.

          since the beginning the things are sadly clear. sadly.

      • Fedir Mykhaylov

        And this mind-mannered

      • Zeddicus23

        AlainCo,
        If you have read the license agreement between IH and Rossi, you would note the following:
        (i) $1.5 M was paid to Rossi upon receipt of the first 1 MW E-cat unit. IH had the right to a full refund within two business days of its request if (a) the plant was not received and (b) the plant was not validated.
        (ii) $10 M was put in Escrow and delivered to Rossi once the plant was validated and was available for delivery to IH and the E-Cat IP was validated. If either condition (plant not validated or E-Cat IP not validated) then IH may instruct the Escrow agent to return the $10M and may terminate the agreement.
        As you know, the plant was delivered, and IH paid the $1.5M. IH then had the opportunity to validate the E-cat and E-cat IP and apparently did so, because they then paid Rossi $10M. So there is no question of Rossi returning this money since the provisions for its disbursement have ALREADY been satisfied.

        P.S. Your off-color comments about “hanging by the balls” are not welcomed and do nothing to help us understand or discuss the substance of the dispute.

        • The IP have not been transferred.
          Dunno if there was an escrow (did not hear of it, maybe they did not dare to face Rossi’s furror, a mistake).
          You can say anything, but IH could not make it work.

          the rest is details, and more and more detail are exiting, and it seems more clear today.

          • Engineer48

            Hi Alain,

            Yes there was escrow. IH had to approve / test the IP Rossi shared with IH before the $10m was released to Rossi.

            It is in the License Agreement.

  • georgehants

    One cannot talk sensibly without Knowing the price they are asking.
    For Mr. Rossi, who if anybody in this World is aware of the value of the territories (possibly) held by IH, it would seem unbelievable that he would not pay a sensible price to end the court case and be legally free, now, to harvest the billions that a capitalist money chaser could achieve.
    With the new xyz-cat these territories must be worth an obscene amount to those greedy people who wish to make money from a life saving technology if freely available.
    He could, if the price is a refund of their paltry investment end all the stupidity that has arisen.
    Very very suspicious, I think.

    • Pweet

      Yes, this would have to be Mr Rossi’s lucky day wouldn’t it?
      Here he is with the 1MW plant proven to be an outstanding success, with a COP of at least 50, when they were originally aiming for a COP of 6 as claimed before the test.
      How good is this? IH have paid for the building of the reactor, in their factory, and paid half of the ERV and his report, and who knows what else, and then through their own stupidity have now decided to bail out.
      And better still, Mr Rossi knows the ERV report is accurate because he has been telling us for weeks now about the qualifications of the ERV and how unlikely it would be that he could have got it all wrong. And Mr Rossi was there for the whole year supervising it all so he can be sure nothing undehand has taken place and the results manipulated.
      This would have to be the equivalent of the proverbial bird of paradise flying up his nose, and here it is,.. dropped in Mr Rossi’s lap.
      If Mr Rossi believes what he has been saying for the last few months I’m sure he will be at the bank first thing tomorrow arranging bridging finance to buy back all rights so he can fully utilize the great results gathered over the last year or so at IH’s expense to soon become the worlds most dazzlingly rich man, and now, all in his own name, not shared with any greedy licensee.
      And so cheap too! I mean IH were willing to pay 100 million dollars for it, and here it is, all now proven, and Mr Rossi can have it all back for a bag of peanuts, relatively speaking.
      This has to be just the best thing that has ever happened to him.

      I think he should show his confidence and snap it up quick before IH change their mind. After all, he did say that earlier on he did offer to give them their money back and cancel the agreement, so the idea can’t be too objectionable to him.

      • Guest

        The offer was not serious – but let’s pretend it was.

        The offer included the licensees and one small plant.
        – But it is the intellectual property that have the most value

        I.H now faces possible bankruptcy and internal lawsuits by investors. Their ability to continue raising money to the field is greatly damaged.

        Linguistic manipulation is all it is, pretending they control or have right to the I.P

        • Pweet

          Nice hat! Nothing to outlandish. Just minimal with a hint of austere.

    • Albert D. Kallal

      But why would Rossi want to pay for something that he believes he owns already?

      Rossi feels IH does not own the IP and considers the contract null and void. For what possible reason do you think Rossi would consider paying for something that he believes he
      already has?

      Why would anyone pay for something they assume they already own? You break in logic and reason is unlimited here.

      It possible that Ross’s position in regards to the contract is wrong, but Rossi clearly believes
      the contract is void, and thus why would Rossi or anyone of sound main pay for something that they believe they already own? Rossi clearly feels that this situation will not
      prevent or hold him back from progressing forward.

      I cannot grasp the logic that someone going to pay for something they feel they don’t have to pay for?

      Regards,
      Albert D. Kallal
      Edmonton, Alberta Canada

  • Hi all

    So the motion to dismiss has failed.

    Kind Regards walker

    • Source?

      • Hi all

        Why else are IH offering to deal?

        Kind Regards walker

        • It’d be best if you didn’t post speculation as if it were fact and breaking news.

          Moreover, nobody will know whether the MTD has failed or not until the court actually decides, which they have not yet.

          Plus we don’t really know what actually transpired here. Rossi sometimes reacts to questions people post as factual, when they are just lifted from somebody else’s comments somewhere and are not credible.

          And beyond that, even if reflecting something that actually occurred between Rossi and IH, the machinations of lawyers are open to interpretation.

  • It’s not clear at all what happened here. We don’t get to see the original comment so far. Rossi may have been responding to incorrect information.

    Dewey also immediately denied any such offer and called it a stunt by Rossi’s supporters.
    https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/User/1580-Dewey-Weaver/

    About all it does for me is say that Rossi believes his lawyer’s nullification of the agreement is in full effect and that makes the idea of sending money back IH’s way to get license rights back ludicrous.

    • Guest

      Notice also that I.H is using the 1MW plant as hostage

      “can have peace by buying back the IH license and the IH 1MW unit for $11.5M”

      • We don’t know that any of this happened.

        • Guest

          Correct
          There is no information that would substantiate that I.H has given up on the Rossi IP

          There are however indications they have not, recently making updates to patent applications.

  • Roland

    To acknowledge that IH has a license that they can sell invalidates the proposition that is already before the court; to wit that there is no license, nor are there any claims to IP, nor any other rights that were once held by IH as they are now, all and separately, extinguished, null and void.

    Rossi refuses because acceptance is a ploy extended in the hope of causing a tactical error that lets IH back into the game via a recognition that they still own something in this.

    Right now IH has nothing until a jury decides otherwise.

    • Pweet

      Without knowing what the wording is, it’s impossible to know whether the offer was put in the manner of Mr Rossi buying back the license or IH just being repaid the money they outlaid for a technology they couldn’t get to work. (they say). Or even if there actually was an offer.
      Mr Rossi has commented on it on his blog but he might like to do this just to throw a bit more mud at IH. I think he has previously thrown all that he had so he might have been pleased to be given another shovel load.
      Anyway, since we don’t have anything else to write about, such as a new all powerful Swedish partner, or a more detailed QuackEcat test report, we may as well stick with this a while and see where it goes.
      Just looking through all the advantages of Mr Rossi continuing from here with a clean slate, I still think it would be a really clever move for him to pay off IH; Providing it all works of course. But who could possibly be more confident about that than Mr Rossi?

      • Gues

        As to my understanding this was not an official serious offer, merely the rant of an aggravated investors from an internet forum.

        • Julio Ruben Vazquez Turnes

          Well. This point if we trust that it is true we have to posibilites.

          -IH wants to return the IP and recover their money because it doesnt work.
          -IH offers this to prevent losing the IP and the money as they believe that they are going to lose the case in court.

          To think. They could have offered this to Rossi at the end of the test. They didnt.
          They have adquired the knowledge even without the IP, sharing that knowledge with “lets say Brilloun” they could develop an alternative system and say that it is a completely new one.

          • DrD

            OR
            IH need to do this otherwise their defence in court that “— could not substantiate —” doesn’t hold up.

          • Guest

            If someone can substantiate that Industrial Heat has offered to sell back licenses, please do so.

          • DrD

            I agree.

        • Omega Z

          I agree and Rossi was answering to someone who passed on a rumor.
          Nothing more…

  • Guest

    This is my understanding:

    A person on LENR-Forum who claims to be an I.H share holder accused other forum members of being involved in a conspiracy with Rossi.

    He told several people who thinks are working with Rossi this:

    “Argon – Thanks for the effort. It’s very simple. Rossi can have peace by buying back the IH license and the IH 1MW unit for $11.5M along with standard terms for when parties end agreements. He has a limited window of opportunity to move. There is only truth and zero testosterone in the prospect of treble damages. In the interim, IH is proceeding with it’s gameplan.”

    Someone then posted it on Rossi’s blog –

    1: He was not speaking on behalf of I.H posting this

    2: He did not expect an answer from Rossi

    3: After having seen the answer he started threatening people with acts of violence and disregard for collateral damage to individuals and the whole industry.

    I.H is now in greater risk of being sued by their investors, and have damaged their prospect of raising more money.

    Of course, the questions was hypothetical in the first place, Industrial Heat is prepared to spend millions fighting for the I.P.

    While this poster does not speak directly for the company, it should be noted that the company has not made any attempts to refute or stop him. It seems they are fine with it.

    • Ophelia Rump

      Oh that offer is just forum rot. It’s not worth the nonexistent paper which it is not written on.

    • Mats002

      Hi Guest!
      You and possible others have added posts as ‘Guest’ here at ECW with statements that implies you talk on betalf of IH.

      The statement “Industrial Heat is prepared to spend millions fighting for the I.P.” is an example of claiming IH representation.

      Any anonomous post here or at other forums is less worth than ‘Rossi says’. We know who Rossi and Leonardo Co are.

      Who are you?

      I am Mats G Danielsson from Sundsvall, Sweden.

      • Guest

        Hello Mats!

        I do not speak on behalf of IH

        I do not speak on behalf of Rossi

        I do not agree that I have claimed IH representation

        I am not directly or indirectly associated with any party

        I respect your opinion and agree that anonymous posts are less worth

        Please speak to admin about removing the “I rather posts as a guest” function

        Please use the “flag as inappropriate” button for any post you think does not belong here

        • Gerrit

          Hi Guest,

          before anyone asks, I do not speak on behalf of the wizard of Oz and you should pay no attention to the man behind the curtain

          • Guest

            Darn you have foreseen exactly where I was going with this.

      • Ged

        I think this is maybe a different “Guest” as his name is not blue? That “Guest” presumably registered his name as “Guest” with Disqus. We could have an infinite never of different gray “guest”s though. Does get confusing.

      • Mats001

        If you wish to ascertain your own identity please provide the following:

        * Proof of ID (Driver license, passport)
        * Proof of address (Utility bill, bank statement)
        * Contact details

        Please sign the uploaded copies with date and signature.

        – Note that this or any information given could be misappropriated.

        • Ged

          Where is Mats000? You know, the one from the Ministry of Truth? I doubt he would agree with such a lackluster and limited identity verification program. Tsk!

          • Mats000

            I was lurking but thy post brought me forth.

            Truthfully my real name is Duke of Winterfell. I shalt ascertain proof of my identity as soon as Mats002 have ascertained his.

            Seriously, is there any proof or indication that Industrial Heat LLC (Tom Darden, JT Vaugn, Cherokee Investment Fund) has “offered licenses to be sold back to Rossi”.

            No there is not – this is all “someone says”.

          • Mats002

            +1

  • DrD

    Easy, they just did it.
    Naturally, they will now fight over it and at least one jury is likely to have a say. That’s the way it works.

  • sam

    Could I.H. sell the license if they could
    find a buyer and new partner pay out
    $89 million and A.R. agreed?

    • Ophelia Rump

      Only if IH could win in court.

      • Brokeeper

        If it were an option, I doubt Rossi would accept the $89M now. Why trade 89M for $890B potential profit?

        • HS61AF91

          sure will be illuminating to see a repro of that 27 June reply

          • Obvious

            The 1.5 million for the plant is probably final, but I foresee Rossi being sued 30 million over the IP issue.

          • Brokeeper

            I’m keeping the faith. 😉

        • bfast

          I think IH is trying to get Rossi caught in a catch 22. They surely believe that he is not flush with cash right now. I am sure he needs the 11 million to build factories and stuff.

          This remains consistent with IH trying to slow Rossi down so that they can beat him to the market. Unless IH proves otherwise, I have them squarely parked in the “skumbag” category in my mind.

        • Private Citizen

          By failure to pay on deadline as contracted, IH revoked that contract, no? Or rather the contract revoked itself as it was an agreement to pay $89M upon submission of a mutually approved tester’s validation report showing COP>6 over a 1 year 1MW test.

          • BillH

            My guess is the report was never signed off on and if there are signatures on it they are the ERV’s and AR’s so it would be up to a judge to decide whether the LA had been broken and who broke it.

          • Engineer48

            Hi Andy who wrote:
            “It seems the end is near. So many of the faithful are beginning to voice their doubts.”

            Pardon? On ECW? I think not.

      • GreenWin

        Let the bidding begin: I will pay $5.01 for said rights. Not my final offer.

        • radvar

          $5.02

          • Ophelia Rump

            That is just mean spirited.

  • Brokeeper

    Perhaps IH was never sure Rossi believed it as well. They threw out the bait to see if Leonardo would bite. If they had, IH would have pulled back their offer and proved the retraction of IP agreement was not valid. Now it may have worked in reverse showing Rossi’s IP retraction, at least in IH’s mind, is valid.

  • Curbina

    I think this is a great example of how a rumor can get out of proportion. As far as I have been able to dig, no recent offer has been made to Rossi by part of IH to buy back the license, and Rossi is reacting to a forum rumor.

    Also, I recall that, at the beginning of all this Complaint matter, Rossi stated that he had indeed offered to buy back the license from IH, and that IH refused. Now, as much as Rossi might want to think that his press release of stripping IH’s from the license is valid, I think the court will determine that, as the license agreement does not grant Rossi the right to determine unilaterally when the license is void.

    As much as I wish Rossi to be victorious on his complaint, one can’t forget that justice is rarely on the side of the righteous when large sums of money are invested.

    • LuFong

      This whole affair is being played out in forums (and the courts). It’s all posturing and threats sending messages from one side to another. It’s cheaper than lawyers.

    • kdk

      I think his willingness to behave like he has demonstrates that his new partner has lots of money too. I would venture a guess that they may have even more than IH, if he’s so confident in their ability to mass produce QuarkX’s.

      • Omega Z

        Tom Darden “Manages” $2 Billion in investment assets.

        That is a far cry from HAVING $2 Billion. Thus, it’s likely it would require the partner to have a whole lot in order to surpass what Darden has in pocket.

        • kdk

          Indeed, it is expensive to set up mass manufacturing. Additionally, they may also have lots of experience with patents and bringing products to market, unlike IH. The haste with which Rossi ditched IH in light of the Quark demos is striking to me, and totally understandable.

          • Job001

            Interesting facts can be explained by the theory that the IH license ceased to have value after a military declaration of “top secrecy” was issued. No proof is offered. However, significant actions by IH can be explained by such an event. Suddenly they didn’t value the license yet the customer was satisfied.

            It’s just a theory I find interesting because LENR is very well demonstrated by ash and excess energy and our military is prone to doing “top secret” eminent domain of promising technology. Nothing has more military value than high level local remote energy supply requiring negligible logistics, nothing. It’s just a theory.

          • SG

            I actually find this theory plausible. Once the patent route is taken, there is a risk of secrecy order impositions by governments. More of Mr. Rossi’s patent applications should have published by now, and haven’t, which indicates this possibility. Any license to such patent applications would drop in value given that secrecy orders can be maintained indefinitely (decades or more).

            The underlying fundamental effect of high COP LENR (e.g., me356 approach) will need to be open-sourced for it to ever see the light of day. At the very least, publish it widely immediately after filing a patent application. Otherwise, the information will quite likely be controlled to protect the interests of certain sovereigns rather than the interests of the people.

          • cashmemorz

            But first we have to substantiate that is what is happening, the government secret take over that is.

          • SG

            It will be difficult to substantiate. Mr. Rossi will be unable to discuss even if asked.

          • cashmemorz

            So another “maybe” waving in the wind…..

          • Kevmo

            This isn’t science, it’s business. The Wright brothers didn’t give their secrets away until they had IP protection and then dozens of well funded a$$#0/3s like Glen Curtis and Samual Langley tried to steal it from them .

          • Fedir Mykhaylov

            Langley did not steal anything from Wright. Its airfield is absolutely the author’s work.

          • Kevmo

            Langley teamed up with Curtiss in a despicable attempt to circumvent the truth in the Wright/Curtiss patent battle by lending his prior failed aircraft to be flown, with very extensive post-learning engineering modifications to the extent that the original craft would never have flown.

          • Fedir Mykhaylov

            Langley Curtis, Kelly, Chanute, Lilienthal, Santos Dumont, Schwarzkopf and others – all working to solve the flight machines heavier than air

          • Michael W Wolf

            Nah, IH are a bunch of angels, protecting the world from that lying snake Rossi. I feel your frustration.

          • I think that final sentence may be more wishful thinking on your part Andy, than any change in sentiment as one denouement at least approaches.

            There aren’t all that many ‘faithful’ here, just people who have come to a judgment that LENR is real and in development, based on the incomplete and in many cases anecdotal evidence available.

            Many have expressed some doubts about the story-line at various times, and often still hold reservations to one degree or another. The critical faculty is in general at least, alive and well I think.

          • psi2u2

            Agreed.

          • f sedei

            Excuse me, but this is a seemingly ridiculous analogy to proclaim “reverence” to Rossi. I doubt that many others in this forum have perceived such an attitude. Acland lays out facts. Adults make their own determinations (logical and without accusation it, is hoped).

          • roseland67

            f sedai

            When we can purchase an Ecat that works as Rossi states, then we can all consider them facts, until then, Frank is repeating suppositions, internet rumors and “Rossi says”, this is an Internet blog after all, he has subscribers/advertisers.
            Hopefully in 2016 we will see a fact, but as usual, I ain’t holding my breadth.

          • Michael W Wolf

            Me too. Darden went to the white house, now ecat is unsubstantiated. I smell a rat.

          • kdk

            Actually, I can think of some more valuable things than that which have been zooming around in the skies for a while, maybe not as immediately as remote long duration power supplies. But I think you may be right. They snatched up the wrong patent, if that’s the case, though.

            They already had the knowledge to plan for these events for decades, so it’s a very flimsy case of needing more time for planning. The necessity of these inventions for the future of humanity is obvious.

          • Omega Z

            I deny having anything to do with that craft. I argued long and hard that with an anti-gravity drive, a saucer shape is the optimal design. The anti-gravity drive provides 100% inertial dampening and the saucer can change course instantly including instant reverse.

            But hey, what do I know. My only official expertise is Warp Drives. I only minored in anti-gravity drives…

          • Omega Z

            This is always brought up in the security and U.S. Military context. Rossi’s patent went through a security review and was not blocked. I also see no reason for it to be blocked as far as security goes.

            From a U.S. Military view, it would be imperative to National Security to bring this technology into use as soon as possible. For them, Logistics make up 40% of costs. Tho they spend 20 Billion$ a year on energy, they spend another 150 Billion$ a year moving and providing the support system. 80% of so called Military bases are actually logistics distribution hubs. This could reduce the number of these bases by half.

  • georgehants

    Could be worth noting that it is Mr. Rossi who is seemingly confirming that he has received a buy back offer.
    One would think he would know if he received a letter or call this morning from his legal people containing such an offer.
    If he has not, then one must ask, what is he taking about.

    • Pweet

      Yes. You would think if there was nothing to it, his first response would be that he knows nothing about any offer. Just the utterances of imbeciles,.. etc.
      Although his response is not proof of anything, it is at least an indication that he believes an offer was around somewhere. Or maybe he just wants us to think there is. Who knows? Not me.

  • GreenWin

    AS Buck commented in the Open thread – IH willingness to sell their license indicates a fear they have a losing court case. DR. Rossi SHOULD NOT settle out of court as a Win substantially proves E-Cat’s technical viability and the doom of knowledge monopolists – fossil-fission industries. All in all a very positive sign for Leonardo and the Trust.

    • georgehants

      GreenWin, good to see you.

  • Ged

    I guess that ship has sailed. Once things got to court, Rossi is confident in his case to get the 89 mil and doesn’t want to give IH 11 mil to settle. That would be a complete loss to him. If he didn’t have to goods, then it would make sense to avoid fraud countersuit, but if he does have the goods, paying back while already in court for 89 mil would be foolish.

  • giovanniontheweb

    broken contract by no respect of terms Mr Rossi can ask for further compensation for the disrupted business. 11.5 milion is in the past

  • sam

    A.R. might tell you he doesn’t know for sure until customers
    beside test customer says so.
    I.H would have been better to
    finance A.R. with the money to
    get product to market and if
    successful say OK now we
    open the vault.
    There also would be any guestioning about A.R. trying to
    get money for nothing.
    A.R. should also not passed on
    the know how on how ECat works.
    Then there would be no question of I.H trying to get something for
    nothing also.

  • Obvious

    This has been blown way out of proportion to the true story of the few posts that started this story.
    The conspiracy theories, Rossi’s overblown reaction, almost all of it.

    Even the offer was never an offer.

    It once was a suggestion of a possible avenue for some reconciliation. It was never anything more than that.
    Now it is a grotesque version of the telephone game.

  • Engineer48

    Hi Roselands,

    IH defaulted on the clause 3.2c conditions, which removed all of the rights Leonardo granted IH under the License Agreement.

    If you default on your car payments and it is repossession, does your finance company give you back all your past payments?

    • Albert D. Kallal

      No but if there is excess equity, then depending on the terms, that excess will be returned to the car owner. So it not a given that all payments are returned, but excess value would be due to the owner in most cases. Same goes for a house foreclosure. A regular house foreclosure means the excess equity is returned to the owner. However, if the lender feels there is excess equity to be had and they obtain a judicial foreclosure, then excess funds don’t go back to the original home owner.

      However, in this case we not talking about a car and payments – so it less then ideal of a analogy. Given the contract, the original 11 million may well be a separate issue as to the 90 million. However, that 11 million was consideration at the point in time when Rossi transferred IP rights. So some possibility exists that the 11 million is also to be refunded if Rossi is to walk away with 100% rights to the given technology. So how this works is not 100% given that Rossi can just walk away with that 11 million.

      Regards,
      Albert D. Kallal
      Edmonton, Alberta Canada

  • pg

    Please let’s move on from this nonsense.

    • Ged

      I don’t see any comments in the Dark Hydrogen thread yet :).

      • cashmemorz

        It too “theoretical” an its all in the “dark” made or little atoms we can’t see with the naked eye and therefore lost in opinion.

  • Ophelia Rump

    Saying it is revoked, makes it revoked in as much as it actually can be revoked. The rest is a legal formality and process.

    If you fail to say it is revoked it is like Schrodinger’s Cat.

    If you sell the rights to someone else without first officially announcing the revocation, you risk being sued for the value because they can claim you never revoked it, whether they had a continued right or not had you revoked it. It was still theirs until the relationship was formally dissolved.

    If you repossess a car, you first take it back and then sell it. If you sell it before you take it back, you sold a car which is someone else’s legal possession at that moment. Although you have a clear claim it is someone else’s legal possession, and selling someone else’s things is bad.

  • Omega Z

    Starting point,

    Person incognito says IH has offered to sell the license back.

    Rossi responds to person incognito-

    Now they want to sell it back after it has already been declared null & void.

    No where is there evidence of any such statement from IH.

    Rossi was merely answering to someone’s post.

    You read to much into this….

  • David_Kaiser_39

    When is this soap opera ending? I’m tired of all of this. The whole world is going haywire, Brexit, Middle East, Trump, The Chinese and and and…

    And we are all here still hoping that the spark will ignite ? Is it the only spark we have right now in the world? I know that the impact of this is bigger than anything we had since the Homo invented the fire (well, actually, Nature invented fire :-).

    Come one, Rossi – please bring this b….s….t to an end and remove all this fog of war, if there is anything to be removed.

  • David_Kaiser_39

    This is not an open discussion? My comment has not been accepted. But it nails it down to the real issue. Why is Rossi not willing to clear all the doubts once and for all? Now, we have to get all lawyers here to discuss?

  • Kevmo

    The ERV report writer (who was chosen by IH) knows.

  • Axil Axil

    The IH contract states that the E-Cat must produce a COP equal to or greater than 4 for 350 non sequential days out of a testing period of 400 days. Rossi must therefore meet performance specs on a day by day basis.

    This contractual condition begs for a daily reconciliation of each days performance results between Rossi, the ERV and IH. If IH does not agree with the ERV on a day by day basis, IH should have registered a complaint to the ERV in writing that the E-Cat performance spec was not met for that given day.

    I am not aware of any daily reconciliation performed between the ERV, Rossi, and IH. Yet the performance spec was verified to be meet for a period of 352 nonsensical days without one exception or protest being registered by IH to the ERV.

    This seems illogical to me. How can IH reject the accumulated daily performance results of 352 days without protesting any of those individual daily performance results while the test was being run?

  • Kevmo

    Penon worked for IH before he worked alongside Rossi. IH nominated him and Rossi agreed.

    • f sedei

      OUCH !

    • Michael W Wolf

      Yea, and Fabiani was an engineer for IH and confirms what Rossi has said on many things. 50 COP needs no special equipment. Why can’t people get this through their heads. SMH

  • Pweet

    In fact Mr Rossi always said, right to the end, the results could be positive or negative, or in Rossicode, the ubiquitous ‘F9’. How can he now be so insistent that the results were always not only positive, but very much so. A COP of 50 would have been obvious to a blind man, if it were real. To now claim there was a long term COP of 50 is completely contrary to all that he said regarding the plant performance over the period of the test.

    • Michael W Wolf

      NDA, Rossi waited for the ERV report. Case closed.

  • Axil Axil

    In general, if a contract calls for contractual requirement A, B, and C to be produced during a test and the systems integrator(IH) latter accuses the OEM(Rossi) that he has not meet one or more of those requirements, the Systems Integrator must have had to document that failure to meet the requirement during the test; i.e. requirement A was not meet. Each of the failed days with its date out of the 400 would need to be documented. If this daily document status is not prepared, it is assumed that the test was passed on that given day.

    IH has not documented that the 50 out of 400 day requirement was not meet in detail. I have not seen that failure to meet the daily performance requirement properly documented which asserts that the requirement was not met as presented by IH in the evidence so far provided.

    Rossi might have failed to meet the daily performance requirement, but IH has not show documented proof that Rossi has not met that performance requirement; at least that I have seen.

    In general, contemporaneous written evidence is far more effective as proof than blanket verbal assertions after the fact,

    • Turbo3

      You seem to not understand that during this part of the legal process IH is only responding to legal points. Once that is done and the Judge rules on which of Rossi’s claims are valid to pursue, based only on law (not any evidence), will they move on the next phases where evidence can be provided.

      The fact that IH has not provided any documents at this stage is expected.

      Whether such documentation exists might come out when they get to the trial phase but there is no point in IH providing it now. The Judge is not interested in see it now.

      • Axil Axil

        If evidence existed from IH, Rossi would have known at some point during the test that the performance requirements were not meet, There would have been documentation generated by IH dealing with 50 days or more of non performance during the test on the record.

      • Michael W Wolf

        IH did record each day. They paid the ERV, Penon to do that for them. They will have to claim Penon’s report was flawed or faked. As far as I can see, IH is going to claim they haven’t been given the IP as per contract to validate by building it. And they seemed to have to contradict themselves to make that claim. IH had no one outside the people we know who had the expertise to show lack of performance.

  • artefact

    On JONP:

    “Frank Acland June 25, 2016 at 5:45 PM
    Dear Andrea,
    You tested the QuarkX with a potential partner and reported your
    results. What has been the response of the testing partner since the
    test has ended, and what is the consequence for Leonardo Corporation?
    Thank you, Frank Acland

    Andrea Rossi June 26, 2016 at 2:08 AM
    Frank Acland:
    The QuarkX is very promising, the work is developing positively, the reaction of the Partner is positive.
    Warm Regards, A.R.”

    • Brokeeper

      Very reassuring to hear “POSITIVELY” vs “positive or negative”. We are well on our way toward the finish line following our Champion Marathoner runner.

  • sam

    Frank is as smooth as this Frank.

  • INVENTOR INVENTED

    What can the Quark X be used for? Are they designed to be linked together? What would be the footprint of a 1 MW Quark X assemblage?

    • Omega Z

      1 MW Quark X assembly may be a small as 1 cubic metre. Possibly a little less. It will depend on other hardware requirement per the task it’s used for.

  • Axil Axil

    There is another speculation about why negative written evidence of reactor non functionality and associated problems with the test did not find its way into the ERV report. IH presented the ERV report to the Chinese and Woodford at a late stage as proof of value during the test to solicit investment.

    It is possible that IH assumed they could just not pay Rossi at the end of the test and if problems arose with this strategy just go bankrupt.

  • Michael W Wolf

    The ERV report showed 50+ COP, Rossi did indeed say something like that. And do you think we care if Rossi achieved that 50 COP for less than the 350 days? Should IH not pay and hold the technology back from the world if Rossi only achieved the 50 Cop for 90 days? IH is hampering world changing technology if Rossi even got it on 1 day. IH doesn’t care about the world and saving it. Or this won’t be their argument. I think IH’s argument will be that they can’t build it as good as Rossi and feel he has violated the contract. I don’t see any other legit angle for IH.

  • Michael W Wolf

    No way in hell! If IH discovered fraud there would have been legal action taken to recover their stolen 11.5 million. You have tunnel vision. Use your peripheral vision. And you’ll see IH is playing semantic games. If everything you see is a scam, that makes you the scammer. Confucius said that.

  • Mats002

    +1

  • clovis ray

    wrong, once again, you actually don’t know what your talking about.
    ‘ it looking good so for’, he said as much many many times over the year.
    you need to go back and read a little of that years, comments here on E-cat world,

  • Fedir Mykhaylov

    Why is it so difficult for a small production can be manually collected.

  • DrD

    Exatly, in fact most days (when asked) he said they were working well.

  • Brokeeper

    We need more open minded engineers as yourself in this energy society.
    When I base my faith on other men I also rely on knowledge, weighing all his/her positive vs negative works and traits, whether it be physical, Intellectual, moral, or spiritual. I find Rossi’s positive to negative ratio overwhelmingly positive. I have never yet seen ‘deliberate’ deception but redirection when required. His integrity, IMHO, is off the charts in comparison. Yes, we all realize the hidden human nature as well the hidden mysteries of nature itself.

  • Omega Z

    Rossi’s “F9” disclaimer was a proper position to take until receiving the Final “ERV” report. That does not say anything to what Rossi’s personal opinion was.

  • Frank Acland

    Turbo, if you go back and look at some of Rossi’s comments during the test you will find that he was quite positive about it on a number of occasions.

    Just some examples:

    Mar 29, 2015: “The E-Cat this week has been good, with very, very extended ssm periods. I prefer to give data regarding the COP after the end of the test.
    From inside the plant,”

    April 9, 2015: “The Lady E-Cat 1MW is stable and the COP is very high, because we are mostly in ssm mode. I am writing from inside the computers container.”

    Sep 18, 2015: On the Journal of Nuclear Physics today Rossi was asked that if the test were to end today, would he consider the results positive or negative. His response was: “Positive with the potential risk to become negative.”

    From this thread: http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/02/18/1-mw-e-cat-plant-watch-thread-update-1-rossi-production-cost-in-kw-is-very-competitive/

  • GreenWin

    Andy,
    how about a disclaimer as to why you continue to violate your own edict promising to never comment here again? YOu lead your flock to the abyss calling itself “science.”