Your inquisitive and analytical mind is on the right track regarding the issues left in the Degicor vs Edig case, and the probable outcome of the case when the Hearings are held in early 2009...

FIRST:

The Courts interpret the agreements between the parties all the time, and make decisions as to what was the "Real Intent" of the parties when they entered into an "Agreement". In doing so, they follow a whole body of statutory and case law of "Contracts" which governs the judicial determinations as to what did the parties mean when they entered into an "Agreement"...

SECOND:

As you have already pointed out the UTAH Court has ruled that EDIG did not sell its IP to BOW and they could use it as they pleased in other devices such as eVU...

And as LL has already said the only issue left is whether EDIG gave BOW or APS a 7 year non-competition with respect to digeplayer use.

As the facts indicate, the NDA which contained the alleged agreement covering the NDA and non-competition clause was never executed in that EDIG never got the $25,000.00 CONSIDERATION promised.

This is First Year Law Student material. It goes to enforcebility of an agreement which was never completed.

Although an OFFER and ACCEPTANCE can be supported by exchange of a peppercorn between the parties, but there has to be an exchange lof CONSIDERATION to support any AGREEMENT.

If EDIG's