Pancho,
AVNT's first product was stolen, and I think they admit that themselves, saying, "Well, it was only a small part of the program." The judge asked, "If it was only a small part of the program, why did you feel that you had to steal it?"
The revised product was supposedly independently cleaned, though some software gurus claim that it would be impossible to rewrite the number of lines of code required in the short time claimed. Nevertheless, CDN has been studying this code for quite a while, and has not yet presented the court with evidence to support that AVNT's second product was also dirty.
AVNT may be up to their third generation product, though I'm not sure. The company and every product they make start with an "A," which is too confusing for me to follow. They probably intend to confuse everyone.
The bottom line is that the court screwed up, big time! The court recognized that AVNT was built on a stolen product, but refused to enjoin it, because that would have shut down the company. The Court of Appeals, and now the Supreme Court, have said the lower court was wrong. But now it's too late, because AVNT has moved on to a second or third generation product, raked in additional tons of dollars, and purchased several companies -- all built on the foundation of that first product, which they stole from CDN.
As far as I'm concerned, the stock should be declared worthless, management imprisoned, and the company's assets turned over to CDN, but I don't know what the courts will do.
* * *
Regarding CDRD, I shorted it earlier for a profit, and have been impressed by its run-up. I'm not sure that it's done, and will watch for a while. CNBC mentioned the company's promise a few days ago, without mentioning the earlier arguments of the shorts: the need for additional financing, the continuing dilution of the stock, the technological questions (some suggest that reception will be hindered over 30 mph, or by rain, or by buildings).
- Charles |
