kjuhygfgbhjnm

4 ms·

1.
by kjuhygfgbhjnm 17y ago
But remember the crackpots (sorry homeopathists) were the innocent victims here - the nasty journalist said they were a buch of frauds - so causing them to lose money and their patients to go untreated.
2.
by kjuhygfgbhjnm 17y ago
No because they didn't lose. It's a standard technique for corps suing individuals, you string the person along for years as they rack up $100,000 in legal fees while your costs are for your own internal lawyers - and wait for them to go bu
3.
by kjuhygfgbhjnm 17y ago
You are a US car company - you find the cheapest supplier and every year cut the amount you are willing to pay - when the supplier goes broke you start again. Most of your costs and effort is put into writing contracts and NDAs and making
4.
by kjuhygfgbhjnm 17y ago
The newly industrial US ignored foreign patents and copyrights - claiming they were an attempt by europe to keep the new country down. Dicken's Martin Chuzzlewit is an attack on the widespread (legal) piracy of his works in the US. It's als
5.
by kjuhygfgbhjnm 17y ago
The newly industrial US ignored foreign patents and copyrights - claiming they were an attempt by europe to keep the new country down. Dicken's Martin Chuzzlewit is an attack on the widespread (legal) piracy of his works in the US. It's als
6.
by kjuhygfgbhjnm 17y ago
The usual arguement is William Smellie's forceps. He was a doctor in the 1700s that invented the forceps used to deliver babies, but because if he publicized them anybody else would have copied the idea he kept them secret. They were indepe