Worlds Inc (WDDD)

[rolvram]

I am all for analogies but yours is flawed on several levels:

a. when you own a property you own the property, signs or no signs. What would count is the deed (think "Klondike")
b. to make the analogy complete forget about the signs but assume the deed did not get recorded to the correct date when ownership started due to an error on the part of the county. This was later corrected but all the documentation proving the original date was there in plain view for the public to find if they did a title search.
c. the fishermen did not necessarily fish there themselves but rather had a "great idea" of using your lake to sell fishing licenses
d. they were put on notice and offered a sublet contract but refused
e. they claim they at least should have been allowed to sell licenses before the title correction date
f. judge says the law is that this is true if the lawsuit was filed before the correction date, if it was filed after then they can be sued from the original and true ownership date.

we have to assume that the "land" was no mans land until Worlds "discovered" it.

Now, this paints a very different picture, does it not? The law is by and large common sense (until attorneys try to put their spin on it as they are paid to do).

reh