"Steady_T" opines & disagrees with JBII skeptics' conclusions

Pretty amazing list of conclusion you have come to.

quote----
I think that what you are trying to say is that the information on the tapes is the Intellectual Property of the customer (in this case MIT?) and as such JB could not use the data for his own purposes without their permission. Is that right? You are forgetting that the tape business is simply a matter of reading the tapes for $22/ tape, nothing more. It was never meant to be a search for space ships, inventions, or business ideas.
-------

You have no idea of what the agreements are between JBII and the companies it is reading tapes for unless you have access to internal company documents. So you can't make any conclusions about what the agreements were or were not meant to be.

quote-----
Well first question: how is he using the secret catalyst then? That catalyst was not invented by JB and is not his proprietary property. It is the invention and proprietary property of MIT. Her is obviously using it.
-----------
Again you have no idea where the catalysts info came from. JB said it came from an archive. He never specified who's archive it was. It could be a public archive for all you know.

quote-----
My assumption about how this would work is that MIT would ship the tapes to JBI to be read. I would expect that MIT would want the tapes back along with the information on new media. After all, it is their data and some of it may be sensitive so I cannot imagine they would allow it in the public domain.
---------

You assume way to much. The NASA contract, as I understand it, requires that the tapes be recycled after the data is recovered. Why would a company want the tapes back? It would cost money to ship them, money to store them, and most importantly THEY CAN"T READ THEM. If they could the tapes wouldn't be sent to JBI in the first place.

quote----
I remember reading something about patents and I believe this was on the CC. I think JB is pursuing patents on the P2o process. It if relies on this catalyst, then I don't see how he can apoply for a patent on an invention that is not his. After all, all he did was read the tape, he did not invent it. Without researching, I would think MIT would not be too happy about it, so he must have an arrangement with them.
---------

Again with the assumptions. JBII has said that the catalyst has been modified from it's original formula to comply with current EPA rules. That makes it a new catalyst and if a patent search shows there is no prior art, it is patentable.

MIT may or mat not be involved. You assumed that earlier without any factual basis.

quote-----
Generally, I would think that those tapes would be a gold mine of information and that the customer, MIT, would want the info ASAP. That would explain JB's comment on the CC that there has not been "significant" damage to the tape business by his lack of focus on it. Interpretation: there has been some limited damage.
----------

Whatever company of University that wants those tapes read has not wanted them read for a long time. If they had, they would have been read before the technology passed them by. Considering that there is only one company that can read those tapes, they will wait. As I pointed out, the haven't been needed for a long time. If there is a company that finds there is now an urgency to get old tapes read, there are other companies in the business. They just can;t handle the difficult tapes.

quote-----
It does not mean he should let the tape business drop (guaranteed income) and focus on what is a risky proposition.
---------------

I can agree with this statement. I'd like to see JBII get a small staff together and start processing the routine tapes.

quote-----

go with the OTCQX, without understanding what it was all about.
------------

And you know this how?

Assuming that the appeal is denied then JB has already positioned itself in the best marketplace available to it in advance of the decision.

If the appeal is upheld, then JBII is in a dual quotes situation that many companies choose to put themselves into.

You again assume that most if not all of his data and tapes come from a governmental agency.

Pretty big assumption since MIT and the oil companies that have been mentioned as users of the tape service aren't govt agencies.

If fact the only one that is a govt. agency that I am aware of is NASA. If you check, most of NASA's data is public if you want to get it. I'm pretty sure that a FOI request will get most of NASA's space probe data, which is what this stuff is described as.

I prefer to assume less and go with what information that is available.

Assuming that "this data affects national security and as such is tightly controlled" is quite a stretch considering that JB has said it is old information that came from 50's or 60's and was considered not worth pursuing at the time.

quote-----
I don't come here to second guess everything I post. I would rather discuss. Some things are just obvious... I don't really care who said what from JBI.
------------

Discuss all you want. I'm more interested in the facts of the situation.

If you don't care what the company has said well what can I say. Facts and information are more valuable to me than speculation.

quote----

Now, again without calling a lawyer if he modifies it it really does not matter. It is still someone else's formula. It is still their invention,. modified or not. Lets discuss..
----------

Let's discuss that fact that JB has said it came from an engineering archive that he has. It was a line of research that wasn't fruitful at the time. Could have been a published paper documenting research. That makes it fair use to pursue and improve. Doesn't really matter.

You assume that it is intellectual property that is somehow protected and that JBII is somehow violating that protection.

If it was from the 60's what intellectual protection would that be?

Not a patent. They expire in 17 years back then. Copyright? Not likely for a catalyst formula. Trade Secret? Not likely in an engineering archive.

Small changes in a formula are all that are required to obtain a new patent. Look at how the drug companies handle drugs.

quote----

nor can we assess it's worth or validity.. i thought it came from NASA. that gave it credibility... now it has lost that credibility. it could have come from a moonshine stand in Arkensaw.. Deliverance?
------------

Don't the results of the process count in your world for conferring validity and credibility?

The IsleChem letter shows that something is working. Do you care if it is the catalyst or some other aspect of the process? The results are the true measure.

We have seen the test results from IsleChem. Shortly we will get results from the process in production.