RE: Edig History... or, Why "Prior Art"... is not going to be/Gill...TK...
in response to
by
posted on
Apr 23, 2008 10:46AM
Thank for your comments...
However, I would like to point out that the post had an objective in mind which made it relevant to present...
FIRST:
We forget that what is said here makes the rounds around the world by being posted on Google...
Debating how many lawyers it takes to litigate an IP case may make sense to the OLD TIMERS here but it can be very boring to potentail NEW investors who are looking here for what all the fuss is about.
Thus posting the elements of what makes up the claims of EDIG in its IP litigation is extremely significant to a NEW possible investor...
SECOND:
Even the old timers get caught up in the subjects they are discussing, sometimes forgetting WHAT they owen...
Doni has been around for a longest time. and he certainly knows more than any one else what is EDIG TECH ABOUT. Yet even he said he did not recall the EDIG Tech as well as in the 2001 10K...
LASTLY:
I am sorry if the post seemed redundant to you. But the heading explained that it was intended to highlight the FACT that a defense of "PRIOR ART" to EDIG claims would be meaningless in light of the History outlined in the 2001 10K...
GLTA...
Gil...