Sorry for the late response, very infrequent logger-in: 1. No, we really don't know IV was behind Oasis. I am guessing you assume this because NPR reported IV

Sorry for the late response, very infrequent logger-in: 1. No, we really don't know IV was behind Oasis. I am guessing you assume this because NPR reported IV gets 90% of profits. But note how they did not prove or even outright state there was any controlling interest; they just throw the 90% number out there and imply it, Glen Beck-style. The original inventor also made millions off Oasis, but can you say he was "behind" Oasis too? Unless there's a clear indication of control (which shell companies make very hard to prove) it is just as likely a "share-cropping" operation as a shell company. Something like the FTC probe is needed to prove anything either way. 2. IV has publicly stated at an FTC panel that (paraphrasing) they do not sue under any name than their own. Now, that's not under oath, mind you, but making such statements in front of a government panel holds some weight. However, I do find it a bit odd that Lodsys put that denial on their website and then removed it.