Replies to post #176778 on Liquidmetal Technologies Inc (LQMT)

[yamasushi]

EXACTLY......

[PatentGuy1]

I remember that post very well - lots of interesting quotations with zero citations. Some quotations were well known, but others were unknown. When asked to provide citations for unknown quotations (See post #170114, https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/replies.aspx?msg=147942277), the author ignored direct and explicit requests for links to unknown citations and ignored the request - NO CITATIONS WERE EVER PROVIDED. There is no way to judge the pertinence or accuracy without citations.

One of the unknown citations is as follows:

While not patented, the chemical composition/ specifications is shared under the spirit of the Parallel License Agreement.

So if the unpatented composition is "shared" under the SPIRIT, but not under the LETTER, of the Parallel License Agreement does anyone know if the territorial exclusions or whether the consumer electronics restrictions still apply?

In our lust for revenue, should we assume that under the SPIRIT of the PLA parts of the PLA that were beneficial for us such as the territorial exclusivity apply but non-beneficial parts don't? 170114

[PatentGuy1]

You cite joshuaeyu post# 170107 for purportedly showing how LQMT will get paid by Asus. The cited post has alleged quotations, with no citations (which means they cannot be checked for accuracy or for the value of the alleged source), from April 2018 - January 2019.

However, on May 14, 2019, LQMT announced "[LQMT] will not pursue application of our bulk Liquidmetal alloys in the consumer electronics field." (See, https://liquidmetal.gcs-web.com/node/11486/html.) LQMT made that pronouncement AFTER the latest of the alleged quotations and made it in an official SEC filing - there are consequences for lying in an SEC filing.

Can you explain the apparent discrepancy?