I will defer to your legal expertise....I know you have said many times that court rulings cannot be predicted. I agree....However in a conversation with RP, in his office, he was quite forceful in his opinion that BOW really had no case and was BS-ing the court to drag this out hoping EDig would give in or run out of money.......

I know you looked with raised eyebrows on my pronouncements of the words of RP, but he has been pretty doggone good for at least a couple of years and I believe him regarding BOW.....I know, I know, it's just RP doing his job....

As I defer to your expertise I am confused as to the non-compete claus you mention. I was under the impression that claus meant it was moot because of EDig going into the market place with a new product. That to me means EDig was not competing with the Digeplayer and I thought it was ruled by a judge that EDig could conduct their business as usual.

However, if the non compete claus MEANT that EDig could not compete in any manner in the same field or any other field as Wencor even if EDig was selling a bar of soap then the next question raised in my mind is just how was EDig able to sell, in direct competition with BOW the eVu's???

If the court ruled, which it did, the first NDA was NOT invalidated by the subsequent NDA then it would seem to me all BOW had to do when EDig started selling it's eVu was go to the judge, point out his ruling, and have the judge issue EDig a "cease" order, or whatever order it would take to have EDig shut down.

So which one is it....