Funny how Josh is capitalizing on some fame for something that I brought up months ago when the filings Came out at at the uspto portal. Sometimes I think he’s real opportunistic…I have always believed that why protect a trademark/brand and it’s usage if it has no value? Then why use Firms historically used by Apple. I don’t think anyone has noticed that eontecs filings in the US do not use these firms. Hmmm, Apple allowed security release back to CIP in 2016, for the Eontec Liquidmetal license, but no we don’t see Eontec be granted pathway to these furns (not saying Apple is blocking them). Seems the Liquidmetal brand is the direct benefit.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
