I want to underline a key point in what you wrote. If and when they reveal positive trial results for either L or Direct, they will be in a very different legal position regarding both defense and offense.
Technically, that shouldn't be the case; A damaging false statement is still a damaging false statement, and improper business actions are still improper, but it does matter whether the underlying drug in question works.
People don't care much if a bad drug got hammered along the way, even if the hammering was illegal and without true basis. But they will care a great deal if a treatment for brain cancer with demonstrated efficacy was put through a nearly impossible gauntlet of lies from multiple sources. Or a treatment for all non-operable solid tumors. And the courts might look the other way, to some degree, regarding minor technical violations at NWBO if their mission to treat cancer validates itself.
They might as well wait for some efficacy feedback, which I believe may come sooner than the end of the trial.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
