I have been a long time support of [H] and Kyle as many of you know. And still am.
With the recent GPP program, I can not support Kyle on this particular way of doing things.
I have consulted my corporate attorneys on this matter and they have stated the same things I have stated in the GPP article thread. Not only that, I took it a step further and posted anonymously on a site that asks for lawyer's opinions here
https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/...nt=question_legal&utm_campaign=comment_notify
Every single attorney that has responded and I have talked to, have stated irrevocably, by AMD (company B) going to the press prior to any potential lawsuit, it hurts theirs and OEM's chances of litigation. The ramifications can go farther than this as well is my understanding. If there is anything that doesn't align with what is going on with the program, with what Kyle reported, it could even come back to [H], in a really bad way. Kyle must answer this as I don't know if his attorneys were involved with talking with AMD's attorneys prior to the communication of this information.
I don't think they were as Kyle would have stipulated this in his article. If they weren't AMD could categorical deny anything that his article and his research uncovers and legally [H] will be held accountable for anything that comes up along with AMD to a lesser extent.
I applaud Kyle for bringing up this matter and the balls to do it, because its a slippery road. I wish the article could have taken into consideration why a company such as AMD, the potential benefactor of such a suit would come out and try to sway the public prior to any legal action taking place. They have a habit of doing this and I hope it doesn't go down the road that I have stated above because now [H] is on the hook for anything AMD does in this particular matter.
When litigation is concerned, the media is never a friend of the parties involved. The "victim" is also never a goody too shoes either, not when they do things like this.
With the recent GPP program, I can not support Kyle on this particular way of doing things.
I have consulted my corporate attorneys on this matter and they have stated the same things I have stated in the GPP article thread. Not only that, I took it a step further and posted anonymously on a site that asks for lawyer's opinions here
https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/...nt=question_legal&utm_campaign=comment_notify
Every single attorney that has responded and I have talked to, have stated irrevocably, by AMD (company B) going to the press prior to any potential lawsuit, it hurts theirs and OEM's chances of litigation. The ramifications can go farther than this as well is my understanding. If there is anything that doesn't align with what is going on with the program, with what Kyle reported, it could even come back to [H], in a really bad way. Kyle must answer this as I don't know if his attorneys were involved with talking with AMD's attorneys prior to the communication of this information.
I don't think they were as Kyle would have stipulated this in his article. If they weren't AMD could categorical deny anything that his article and his research uncovers and legally [H] will be held accountable for anything that comes up along with AMD to a lesser extent.
I applaud Kyle for bringing up this matter and the balls to do it, because its a slippery road. I wish the article could have taken into consideration why a company such as AMD, the potential benefactor of such a suit would come out and try to sway the public prior to any legal action taking place. They have a habit of doing this and I hope it doesn't go down the road that I have stated above because now [H] is on the hook for anything AMD does in this particular matter.
When litigation is concerned, the media is never a friend of the parties involved. The "victim" is also never a goody too shoes either, not when they do things like this.
Last edited: