InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 1
Posts 559
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 03/12/2008

Re: stupidassdrummer post# 21082

Thursday, 05/15/2008 1:50:49 PM

Thursday, May 15, 2008 1:50:49 PM

Post# of 40625
Firstly, the patent is owned by Nickolas et al and he can license to whom ever he likes. The licensing fee and the royalties would go to Nickolas not Nutripure. If the contention is that Nutripure owns the patents ... most likely the court case is patent rights ... the fees and royalties are a revenue stream for Nutripure. That would be great for the investors. Steve et al in his email threads to the board have not indicated the later; otherwise he would be feeding the info in some fashion to pump the stock. Steve filed the court action to protect his patent rights, so I believe that Steve benefits not the Nutripure investor. Shortly before this case was filed I talked with Zouvas regarding my investment groups rights to the patent ... his contention was the patent rights were Nutripure's not Nickolas' and acknowledged the investors rights to revenue streams associated with Nu2O. I would venture a guess that they will settle with Nutripure having a right to practice the technology and allow Steve as a patent owner to license further with some type of royalty going to Nutripure and the investors. Long and short both parties will be able to prosper ... that would be in the proper spirit to allow the product to come to market. IMO