I have a hard time believing Nash was an innocent victim. If you believe her claim, she got MAXD to sign a deal paying cash and stock to pursue an unknown and likely worthless trademark violation, and kept the more valuable patent/idea theft for herself.
It appears she took action in objection of the MAXD/VSL agreement only after learning of a proposed settlement, one negotiated by the MAXD provided legal team. That action appears to have been an attempt to remove MAXD and its shareholders from any share of a settlement, and to take it all for Nash/Vedanti.
None of us know for sure what happened (at least not yet), but it is certainly a possibility that Nash/Vedanti intended to fraudulently misrepresent to MAXD, take the cash, stock, and legal activity MAXD provided, and keep the apparent MAXD settlement share for themselves.
And that's not to say that MAXD is an innocent player; I simply don't know. However, I am not aware that MAXD ever attempted to exclude Nash/VSL from a share of a settlement, or changed the agreement after it was executed. Certainly the possibility exists that MAXD could have made changes to the original draft, but VSL never brought any evidence for that to a court to review, something you would certainly expect them to do.
The nature of VSL activities that occured during the dispute, including attacks against an unrelated third party individual, have appeared to me to be a planned attempt to destroy MAXD, so that MAXD could not fight VSL's challenge or be in a position to claim it's share of a settlement. If a settlement does end up happening, with an amount into nine figures, it would confirm a whole lot of reasons ($$) to try to steal MAXD and it's investers share of the settlement.
