Worlds Inc (WDDD)

[22na22]

[QUOTE]

As far a further technical development, the company spun out its technology to WORX now MRMD as a 1 for 3 dividend for shareholders in 2012 who have benefited with a s/p of $.65.

This isn't really "further technical development," is it? From what I understand from both company's public filings, the split-off was mostly to just be able to distinguish between the patent company and the technology company, in order to more easily proceed with the legal case. Yet the technology you listed in your post hasn't been cultivated or grown in any way.

From the 2013 10-k: "These improvements include but are not limited to porting of the original Worlds player platform to a new rendering engine, Wild Magic, which provides for faster rendering of graphics and communicating with current graphic chip sets that are now standard in PC’s."

From the 2014 10-k: "Going forward we intend to focus solely on the development of virtual worlds, establishing strategic partnerships and pursuing related synergistic technology acquisitions." No mention of developing Wild Magic or creating any new technologies using the patents involved.

From the 2015 10-k: "We are currently directing our efforts to developing and expanding the medical marijuana part of our business and we are currently contemplating spinning off the 3D business." No mention of developing Wild Magic or creating any new technologies using the patents involved.

From the 2016 10-k: "Worlds Online’s subsidiary MariMed Advisors, a professional management company in the emerging medical cannabis business dominated the Company’s revenue in 2016. Worlds Online original core business of creating 3D entertainment ‘Worlds” through entertainment portals was basically dormant in 2016."

How do you expect a judge to take Worlds seriously as a technology company when they're publicly telling us technology isn't even a part of their business anymore, and they have completely stopped pursuing any sort of revenue-generating product with their patents since before the company was even spun off?

Just some off-topic questions I've had for a while about this patent play. Seems like it would have helped WDDD's case to at least try and develop new technology to prove that Activision has been stepping on their toes and getting in the way of them using their patented technology to be successful. But the reason I asked about the conversations between Kidrin and Activision many years ago is because that can also be a crucial part of the trial.

Hopefully someone with more wisdom than I can help. But to me it seems like a judge may simply read their financial statements and laugh.