Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Gold and Silver Stocks and Related Commentary -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E. Charters who wrote (18154)	10/8/2005 2:24:01 AM
From: Michael Bidder	Respond to of 18308

E, Thanks, I must read and re-read that pontification. Michael

To: E. Charters who wrote (18154)	10/11/2005 3:57:03 AM
From: Michael Bidder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18308

Eric: "There are all kinds of lead zinc showings around. Their are few large geochems in silver and that is the key that would make me excited about staking. Geochems in silver are legendary. A larger silver geochem, due to the high mobility or ephermal nature of the substance can nought but come from a large source. The IMR geos knew that and staked accordingly. Now assuming that the judge concurs with the above, and I think it can hardly escape his attention that the conclusions I have come to are obvious, there exist some other legal issues. For me that will be the interesting part. It is fine to say IMR staked on data found in Newmont's office and evidently so, but quo vadis?>>>> Eric, 1) If AQI expects to claim ownership because of some data that IMA received from Minura, then I say Minura is guilty of "entrapment". 2) If Minura wanted the fruits of the data that they gave to IMA then they should have made that clear when they gave it to IMA!