The Feb. issue of Fortune has an interesting article on "Patent Trolls".
President Obama in a press conference said this when asked about so called patent trolls;
"The folks you are talking about are a classic example, they don't actually produce anything themselves. They're just trying to leverage and hijack somebody else idea and see if they can extort money out of them".
REFR and Joe as a TROLL.
Is that a stretch? Yeah, I can see that!
Ah, Niri, Haller & Niro, the original patent Troll. The fim first dubbed as a patent troll br then Intel counsel Peter Delkin. Yes, a wonderful firm. A modern day shake-down artist that would do any Chi-town mobster proud.
Just taking on Sony, Amazon and the nearly bankrupt Barnes&Noble?
The perfect patent troll story, a company that has not materially deployed its patent seeks to complain that other are using IT'S OWN intellectual property. Hmmm, Sony doesn't have the R&D capacity to do a low voltage screen without something Joe "cooked up" in his kitchen at home? Oh, Please!
Bet none of this litigates and none of it ever amounts to diddley for revenue to REFR.
You infer, Joe implies. That is, when he is not outright lying.
Patent infringement? Get real! Who is making any money selling SPD based products? Not REFR.
Who else? After you do a thorough search come back and ask again.
My guess is that someone started asking Joe some hard questions about active patents, maybe inspired by reading this forum. No one here can point out any unexpired patent that could conceivably protect REFR if another company thought is worthwhile to develop their own version of SPD. Chase can't, and he has been around REFR since about 1985. Hawaii_John can't, I bet you can't, and I'm sure Joe can't.
So what does Joe do about that embarrassing problem? He makes up a story about infringement, and now he can avoid answering the question by saying that pending litigation prevents him from making comments. What a joke!
Mr. ducats,, You are correctly derisive of Joe's "litigation prevents us from discussing infringement..." blah blah blah. This is the statement of a stock scammer who has pocketed millions from poor schmucks who are holding the worthless shares.
This litigation/infringement gambit is part of their play book. It is akin to the NDA agreements that REFR has always hides behind; they cannot make comments about the progress of SPD products (there never were SPD products) at their "licensees" because of these nonsensical non disclosure agreements. The fact is that ANY respectable licensor has obligations to THEIR shareholders. That includes timely progress reports about the licensees, especially when it is the ONLY source of income (zero for REFR, of course.).
If one was to take REFR's transparently dishonest claims seriously this would be the only licensor who has not reserved a single right that is common with any royalty company. Not a single right!!!!
If Joe mentioned a potential infringement suit it would have to be that REFR is doing the suing; otherwise he probably would never mention it.
If REFR is claiming that they will sue someone regarding a patent infringement, you can bet a lot of money (if any of you longs have any left after "backing up the truck" from 20+ down to 3+) that nothing will come of it.
Here's why; REFR claims to have a portfolio of patents. Shorts like myself always laughed at that claim and generally see them as worthless. Yet it has been a good marketing tool to reel in the bozo investors who are long this scam.
REFR insiders do well going long, going short, getting stock options. They don;t need to rock the boat and have a court look at ay of their activities or at the worth of the patents they claim to own.