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.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : Fonar - Where is it going? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: WebDrone who wrote (10657)	8/3/1998 1:41:00 AM
From: BBurrows	Respond to of 19354

WebDrone, You have a very poor attitude. I post facts and instead of refuting what I posted based on the facts (which you cannot do), you take evasive action and hurl insults. This is the sign of a very childish and immature person. Grow up! You and SpinShooter are simply DEAD WRONG and can't admit it! I'd like to see you try and win an argument based on the facts instead of name-calling. Your only response (to Frank) was 'lots of bad cases win, lots of good cases lose'. The issue was not 'are jury verdicts fair' but SpinShooter and your accusation that Fonar never won against GE for Patent Infringement. We were simply maintaining that you both were dead wrong about that. Also, GE seemed to have thought A LOT about MAO before Fonar got an injunction banning them from using it! So you are wrong about GE not caring because it was being used on a majority of their machines until they lost the court case! I posted the link providing the court decision, patents which were violated and the amount of the award and you STILL aren't satisfied because it didn't make a major wire release??? This in your mind makes it untrue??? What planet are you on? Everyone but you and SpinShooter who invests in this stock KNOWS that Fonar won against GE for patent infringement. The proper venue was civil court and this is where it was tried! Now go ahead and show us all how mature you are by hurling insults and avoiding the facts - again. You do it so well.

To: WebDrone who wrote (10657)	8/3/1998 7:40:00 AM
From: FRANK ROSSI	Respond to of 19354

HI WEB DRONE, So bad cases win and good cases lose . Well I guess Fonar's good case back in 1986 against J&J lost HMMMM. Look what you don't understand is Fonar had to stop GE and the rest from Stealing . It's part of he BIG PICTURE. Even if GE and the rest steal again they must put into the cost what it's going to cost them down the line. If GE continues to lose suits they either will stop or leave the business. Fonar must make it expensive for them to steal. Also IF MAO can be used say in the OR 360 GE will not be able to use it there either . As Fonar continues to stop the competition from using their technology with injunctions Fonar can make a market for their products. So these cases and settlements are important and are part of the BIG PICTURE. WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE THE BIG PICTURE IT'S RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU YOUR THOUGHTS FRANK

To: WebDrone who wrote (10657)	8/3/1998 8:59:00 AM
From: James L. Fleckenstein	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 19354

Other than bringing up old war-wounds, does it really matter to present-day events whether the court was a patent court or a civil court case? I mean Frank has a point, doesn't he, that what was wanted was money and a legal precedent. If that was accomplished the issue of what court it was in should not matter, right? I am curious, though, if ithis was a patent case, why was it not fought in a patent court? The ability to use a jury, or what?