Thanks, Jake, for another illuminating post. You
Post# of 155668
(Total Views: 476)
Posted On: 08/07/2021 2:58:39 PM
Thanks, Jake, for another illuminating post. You clearly know what you are talking about. Just as clearly, I don't. In my family we all gave ourselves "A.A.D" degrees, which meant that we were Also A Doctor. But none of us had our A.A.L. degree.
Meanwhile, something I found interesting were the several SA lawyers who had represented Merck in patent litigation. Clearly someone at SA is advising CYDY in their patent issues with Dr. Ted TennisShoes. I know you were heading off in the Merger and Acquisition direction, but I was really more thinking of Merck in connection with a product license for a particular indication (even though I believe NP at one point said they wouldn't be licensing Leron for separate indications).
Now let's say that were the case -- that Merck (for example) wanted to license Leron for cancer. Maybe as a successor to Keytruda, which is used for breast cancer (and many other cancers). Keytruda loses its patent in 2028. So let's continue to wonder what Merck might want from CYDY before such an agreement. Maybe the legal assurance that CYDY owns Leron, lock stock and barrel -- maybe they would want any patent litigation cleared away to come to such an agreement. And maybe they would suggest a company that could help CYDY quickly win a patent litigation case. Which could be why CYDY brought out the dreadnought battleships, as Jake said, for this little pond skirmish.
So, okay. I have no AAL degree, which means I am almost surely barking up the wrong tree. My dog literally does this, by the way. There are nine Maybes in this post so far, and I'm not even finished. Although maybe I am.
Meanwhile, something I found interesting were the several SA lawyers who had represented Merck in patent litigation. Clearly someone at SA is advising CYDY in their patent issues with Dr. Ted TennisShoes. I know you were heading off in the Merger and Acquisition direction, but I was really more thinking of Merck in connection with a product license for a particular indication (even though I believe NP at one point said they wouldn't be licensing Leron for separate indications).
Now let's say that were the case -- that Merck (for example) wanted to license Leron for cancer. Maybe as a successor to Keytruda, which is used for breast cancer (and many other cancers). Keytruda loses its patent in 2028. So let's continue to wonder what Merck might want from CYDY before such an agreement. Maybe the legal assurance that CYDY owns Leron, lock stock and barrel -- maybe they would want any patent litigation cleared away to come to such an agreement. And maybe they would suggest a company that could help CYDY quickly win a patent litigation case. Which could be why CYDY brought out the dreadnought battleships, as Jake said, for this little pond skirmish.
So, okay. I have no AAL degree, which means I am almost surely barking up the wrong tree. My dog literally does this, by the way. There are nine Maybes in this post so far, and I'm not even finished. Although maybe I am.
(9)
(0)