ted striker...

This round of discussion was started by someone suggesting there was a chance that the Court in UTAH would rule that EDIG in essense sold some of its Patents to BOW!?...

My recollection of the sum total of the RULINGS by the Court in Utah on the parties Motions was that...

1) EDIG did not sell its IP patents to Bow and,...

2) The Court would Rule on the nature and extent of the party's obligations under the NDA agreements in the future, (which is now set for first part of 2009...

The NDA agreement presents two issues to be decided by the Court..

FIRST:

Was there a binding agreement? Here, the evidence propounded by EDIG is that there was no payment of the "CONSIDERATION". If this is so, the Court will have to decide for EDIG in that an agreement can not be deemed "Executed" creating obligations for the parties unless there has been an exchange of "CONSIDEARTION" between the parties...

SECOND:

The next issue is what are the damages, assuming the Court finds there was an enforceable agreement between the parties!?

In this case the terms of the agreement called for a 7 year non- compete period which runs out in 2009. Here the Court will have to decide was eVU covered by the Non-compete clause? My guess is that in light of the Court's Ruling that EDIG could create and sell eVU, that part of Ruling will be in EDIG favor, because EDIG did not make and sell any digEplayers after the break up with BOW...

LASTLY:

There is the matter of "Interference with advantageous economic relations, i.e. the ALITALIA nonsense and the like", which both parties were guilty of...

Considering that BOW bought a "crock of bull" from APS guy, and the fact that BOW's conduct does not reflect an aggreived poor plaintiff with clean hands, the Court more probably will throw the whole law suit out, with each party bearing their own costs...

All in my opinion of course...

GLTA...

Gil...