Might I provide some different points of view from real-world (i.e., personal) experiences... Sometimes decisions are not so clear-cut... I've come to a conclusion in my life that those who live by absolutes probably live in a box, or have not been involved in a sufficient number of situations to realize that what one thought was a clear, black or white, right or wrong decision, all of a sudden isn't. I was helping out a very bright (PhD at age 15), but unconventional inventor in ~2003. We had made good progress and things were looking up for investment opportunities. Unfortunately, one of the persons involved was a real slime-ball. When the inventor went oversees, on his return trip he was refused admittance back into the US because his VISA expired -- he was a Canadian citizen, and wasn't too diligent about keeping watch on annoying details, like the VISA renewal period being shortened! So the slime-ball took this 'opportunity' to change the locks on the lab to secure the prototype, create a new business entity and transfer all assets, and then filed suit... we tried to fight the legal battle, and won the first few rounds, but the inventor's health suffered and he couldn't get the $ to continue the fight, and the slime-ball ended up getting a summary judgement, thus, succeeding in stealing the technology/business. You will to this day find a legal judgement against the inventor, but if you don't know the details, you will come to the wrong conclusion as to who was right, and who had integrity. The legal system is just a tool in business, and if you don't have the money to use that tool, regardless of whether you're right or not, you will lose... I personally am friends with a very competent businessman who has been fighting a major oil company over gasoline leaking into the ground from one of their service stations. Even though he has overwhelming evidence that 50000 gallons leaked instead of the 50 gals they claim, he has spent years and millions fighting this in the courts, both state and fed'l. You'd think it should be cut-n-dry, but the legal system has a very complex set of rules and if your attorney slips up just once, it could cause you to lose the battle... NOT because you weren't right; NOT because you didn't have the evidence to prove your point, but simply because you didn't follow procedure; didn't follow the rules. The inexperienced think that truth will prevail; justice will be served! Unfortunately, that is not guaranteed. Its not surprising that he has a VERY jaded view of the legal system these days... As far as Rossi's 'fraud' charges... What if Rossi had done enough experiments to know that he was onto something, but, as many transformative technology inventors find, it is very difficult to get the $ required to continue the work. So you begin to stretch the truth, and if things get real desperate, lie, in order to get the $ you need... I would look to how the money was spent to determine if it was that grey area. If the person was buying fancy cars and using the money for 'lifestyle enhancement', then I'd say they deserve the scoundrel label and time in jail. However, if they spent the money on the research and lived a very modest life, then I'd cut them a little slack. Doesn't make it right, but in the real world, things are not always black or white. Perhaps for a well established business, there's not much 'grey' area.... but in my experiences with 'fringe' or 'out there' startups, there's alot of grey... Ask yourself this question: If you had done experiments and knew that given a reasonable amount of $ you could prove that this wonderful discovery works, how far would you go to get the resources you needed? We're not talking a new kind of toaster.. we're talking about how the world produces energy. The very wheelwork of civilization is energy -- all manufacturing, transportation, communication is energy-hungry... Reduce the cost of energy to 1/100th of what it is now, and it will transform the planet... overall, for the better. And if that new energy is clean, then its all the more important... and greys the situation/decisions even more. Both Jones and Jed make valid points on this topic... and Steve reminds us of the history. Its good to have all that collective knowledge to work off of. My position is, knowing Rossi's past means be a bit more cautious, but the importance of the discovery warrants giving him a chance and some time to answer all the questions that will come... BEFORE one starts with the judgements! As I've argued before on this site, be careful about rushing to judgements when you do not have intimate details of the situation. For the bright inventor I mention above, unless you are one of 10 people who were directly involved, you could not possibly know what really went down and who was the real scoundrel... in today's world, perception and reality are seldom the same.
Forever Hopeful, -Mark
