It's a shame you write so much ado about nothing. You are so full of the same S**T you laugh so much about in others, I can't believe it. Re: "tern claimed the benefit of docsis including s-cdma would be the significant royalties they'd generate by becoming the "next" docsis standard."
As noted in their 10-k, they told the truth and you haven't and can't pointed to a place where they claimed otherwise concering royalties from DOCSIS as you imply it, except in your OWN lying words. Your claim that even I, Me, I, ever claimed otherwise is wholly unsupportable, as is the claim that I ever said they'd make piles of cash. You obviously make this stuff up as you go along, and still haven't a word of explanation for your bold and obvious lie(mistake???) where-in you falsely claimed TERN didn't even sell DOCSIS products, when in fact they did. Anyone listening to you would have believed there was but a snoballs chanch in hell of S-CDMA ever becoming a part of the DOCSIS standard, and that TERN suggested such would be the case was a huge part of your complaint. But TERN was correct, not lying scoundrals, and you, well, you weren't correct and WERE a lying scoundral(and obviously still are as you put words I never wrote into my keyboard).
I did NOT mis-quote you, I have(and can again) quoted your lying report verbatim and never denied that TERN sold DOCSIS products designed and manufactured by others(it's a moot point where your lie is concerned). Since then, Tern became the ONLY company, THEMSELVES ALONE manufacturing DOCSIS 2.0 compliant chips. Funny how the tables turned, eh?
Now, THAT is reality wholly inconsistent with your blather, and VERY consistent with TERN's statements all along.
Dan B |
