Greenshift Corporation (GERS)

[Harry Winston]

Huh? I is so confused...

If GERS gets an infringing company to be a customer that could be... dangerous?

It's hard to ignore your poor grammar skills, but I'll try.

However, your poor understanding of business cannot escape my comment. The companies that are infringing on Greenshift's patents (according to the lawsuit that Greenshift filed) are doing so because they wish to use the same patented process to produce the same products (or similar products). Their customers are in the same industry as Greenshift. These customers are buying these products, made from the corn plant, and are processing them even more for the purpose of selling their own products and services to their own customers.

Greenshift is doing the same thing. Their raw material is also a part of the corn plant. Their product is also sold to their own customers, sometimes through companies that have licensed Greenshift's technology.

The infringing companies do not have a business model that involves using Greenshift's products. Instead, their business model involves competing with Greenshift. If any of these infringing companies had a voluntary contractural relationship with Greenshift, and if these companies continued to infringe on Greenshift's patents, then Greenshift is likely to lose their ability to say, in court, that their customer doesn't have their permission to use Greenshift's patent.

The terms of the contract would probably give the client the explicit permission to use a technology that is explicitly described in the contract. If Greenshift accused their own client of infringing on a Greenshift patent, the contract itself would then be used in court to show that the client company had Greenshift's permission to use that technology, and the lawsuit would be quickly dismissed.