Replies to post #301967 on NeoMedia Technologies, Inc (NEOM)

[lesnshawn]

Popt: They told us...

2.4.
The Scanbuy sublicense to NeoMedia in this section is expressly conditioned upon Scanbuy fulfilling its obligations under the “Exclusive Patent License Agreement,” dated March 5, 2008, between Scanbuy and MFR, provided however that Scanbuy shall take no action to terminate the Exclusive Patent License Agreement solely in order to terminate the sublicense granted to NeoMedia herein. The sublicense to NeoMedia granted in this section shall subsist so long as Scanbuy has a license to MFR Licensed Patents,

We can easily infer that Scumbye is "Marshall the Troll's" ONLY vehicle of legitimacy because we know the meaning of EXCLUSIVE:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/exclusive
1ex·clu·sive
adjective \iks-'klü-siv, -ziv\
: not shared : available to only one person or group

Scambuy never PR'd directly that the exclusive agreement w/ MFR is gone. So, this notion that they put out word to, together, in September two weeks AFTER NeoMedia terminated Scumbye's license, announcing to the world that with them having agreements w/ MFR that their clients are "protected", MFR promptly turned around and cancelled their agreement w/ Scambye so that MFR could sue NeoMedia's clients by themselves is...FRIVOLOUS.

What we do know is that the only place we've been told such information is on this stock message board by the one I'm replying to. Outside of that, nothing official has been released to verify or backup that claim, making that claim frivolous.

And, what is is we're explicitly warned about information posted here by iHub themselves?
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/terms.aspx

Members should also be aware that other members may use iHub for personal gain. Therefore, everyone should approach messages with appropriate skepticism and objectivity.
Messages posted by individuals may be misleading, deceptive, or in error.

So, the real question here is...Why should we believe this post?
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=97351456
Or any other information posted w/ an air of being factual but w/ no corroborating links or verifiable information to back-up the claims?

So, I state again...

Now we're trying to be told that less than two weeks AFTER NeoMedia terminates Scumbye's license to use their patents when Scumbye "teams up" (as we know) w/ MFR to "educate" the industry on how to stop "frivolous" QR code patent attacks after while at the same time re-affirms their agreement w/ MFR to their use of MFR's patent portfolio (per their joint 9/30/13 PR announcing this to the world)...
MFR then turns right around after that and proceeds to terminate those very same patent agreements w/ Scumbye for the sole purpose of, by themselves, "educating" the industry on how to be scum sucking, paper pushing pimp trolls by staring a slew of frivolous QR code patent lawsuits.

I ask straightforward...PROVE IT! Otherwise, that claim should be questioned by all as to it's truthfulness.

Remember iHubs own warning of such unverifiable claims.

lns