Judy, Viking was making the following point:
When he posts assertions, with links to PRs, Tweets, filings, patent applications with joint signatures, etc. some will simply call it false without any evidence. While I recognize that at this point the burden of proof is on EPGL, many wild statements are thrown around without any evidence at all, just mere speculation. So Viking just did what many others do all the time here. Make statements without anything to back it up, or using old news. A great example is the latest patent discussion. EPGL told us that one of their patent filings had an issue because it should have been filed as 3 separate patents. They said they were adjusting fire based on the opinion and thought it was good news. Months later, we hear the sky is falling, this won't get approved etc, but no evidence. There are patent applications with EPGL and COO joint signatures and PR that says both EGPL and COO will address "ongoing prosecution of several related joint patent applications" which means on some level they are still working together. Instead we hear, without evidence that the relationship has been severed.
Viking was making a simple point. What's good for one should be good for the other.
