Don’t provoke the civilization, it bites.
I actually read my spam.
No, that’s not exactly right. Because of my past life, I get a sizable percentage of e-mail from people who would otherwise be putting up fliers at the local monthly UFO watchers Meet Up.
I have a kindred spirit with these people who range in lucidity from giving me a call periodically to see if I’ll help get attention for their injustice to just sending me crazy e-mail about their ongoing litigation with the US gov’t. There are a surprising number of veterans among them, which I find very sad. At the end of the day they are so much like me, with a cause they champion and the megaphone of the Internet. They just seem to be missing that internal compass that tells the rest of us that we’re really overlooking a key point. Or that perhaps we aren’t right.
Perhaps I possess a modicum of self-doubt that they lack, or perhaps the chemicals in my brain are in better proportion. Either way, I feel that if Alzheimer’s ever hits me, I’ll be on the other end of this transaction.
Today’s is a first for me. I’ve never had an Asian crazy spam before. So here it is for all you’re viewing pleasure. Here’s my favorite quote, by the way:
"If everyone can tramp down on
law and publicly provoke the civilization of the world, like Du Pon and its CEO
Holliday have done, what the world will be? "
Who has humiliated he、she and it?IMPUDENT DuPont of USA and
Holliday!
是谁让他、她和它蒙受耻辱？是无耻的美国杜邦和贺利得!
1. Dare Du Pont and its CEO Holliday deny this publicly? They absolutely
dared not, as what I said is all truth.
2. If everyone can tramp down on
law and publicly provoke the civilization of the world, like Du Pon and its CEO
Holliday have done, what the world will be? Logic here is simple, As Du Pont
and its CEO Holliday can tramp down on the “Contract Law” and seize the patent
of the others as its own before the eyes of the public of the world, why other
people cannot kill and loot in defiance of the Criminal Law and be encouraged?
3. Due to the stipulations concerning secrecy in the “Biological Evaluation
Agreement”, please forgive us that I and Mr. Huang cannot make public our true
names. But Du Pont and its CEO Holliday absolutely know our true names.
Best wishes
SXF 01. July 2006
Explanation:
Du Pont Chemical Company of the United State has for several times required
to submit the dispute between it and our side to an arbitration organization.
Respecting the requirement of Du Pont, we sent a version of “Arbitration
Agreement” in a registered letter to Du Pont on January 16, 2006, with an
enclosure saying if Du Pont raises no objections, we will appreciate it if Du
Pont sign and affix its seal to the agreement and mail the rest two copies back
to us in 30 days. If Du Pont has objections, it may produce a version of its
own. Meanwhile, we have sent the “Arbitration Agreement” and an enclosure letter
by e-mail to info.china@chn.dupont.com and info@dupont.com
24 times on January 26, February 6, February 10 and February 15, 2006
respectively. Now more than 30 days have passed, far exceeding the time that
needs for finding proof and making a decision, and we have received no reply.
This is most likely another trick played by Du Pont for the purpose of
repudiating its debt. We therefore send this e-mail and ask for your pardon if
it does any convenience to you. If possible, we request you tell Du Pont not to
play this kind of trick any more. (As many people with the public relations
department of the Du Pont Chemical Company excel at Chinese, the registered
letter and e-mail we have sent are not translated into English.)
IMPUDENT, SCOUNDREL, DuPont of the United States!无耻，无赖，美国杜邦和贺利得!
IMPUDENT,
SCOUNDREL, CEO of DuPont Holliday !
DuPont Co. and its CEO Holliday are
transnational scoundrel!
Without open objection, DuPont is openly admitting itself to be a
transnational scoundrel!
We firmly believe that the United State is not a country that shields and
connives at rascals and the American government is not a government that
shields and connives at rascals!
We request the American government actions to intensify the law enforcement
strength to protect
intellectual property rights,force transnational
scoundrel DuPont to carry out it’s voluntarily
promised obligations in the
agreement.
*************************************************************************************************
Hello, my respectable President Mr. Bush:
The fact that DuPont declined
to fulfill the agreement has been presented to you for several times via president@whitehouse.gov; As a
result, president@whitehouse.gov sent back
three letters containing the following same contents on the behalf of Mr.
President in Sep 2004:”Thank you for e-mailing President Bush. Your ideas and
comments are very important to him.” My ”ideas and comments” are as follows: it
is verified by Mr. Huang with adequate facts and irrefutable legal evidences
that DuPont must disburse Mr. Huang patent fee, license fee or equivalent “Utter
Compensation” fee and DuPont’s persistent refusal to disburse these fees
infringes upon the intellectual property rights of Mr. Huang. president@whitehouse.gov mentioned
”are very important to him.” I don’t dare to unduly surmise the meaning of “very
important” to Mr. President; However, according to my humble opinions, there
exits the following “important”: on the one hand, respectable Mr. President, the
American Government led by Mr. President as well as the great American people
bitterly hate the predation of the intellectual property rights of
others
through brazen means such as stealing, shameless acts; in contrast, DuPont is
committing such brazen and shameless deals; on the other hand, the number of
your country’s intellectual property rights in a variety of fields is far in
excess of that of any nations in the world and suffers greatly from rights
infringement. Therefore, your government always reserves no efforts in urging
other nations to intensify the law enforcement strength to protect your
country’s intellectual property rights. However, while your government reserves
no efforts in urging the Chinese government to intensify the law enforcement
strength to protect your country’s intellectual property rights and receives
your “more encouraged” praise, DuPont is infringing the intellectual property
rights of Mr. Huang through various extremely brazen and shameless means, which
constitutes an extremely bad signal to the governments and public of other
nations in the world, a extremely “good” model for current and potential thieves
of intellectual property rights, an enormous damage to your government
protection of your country’s intellectual property rights, and a tremendous
humiliation to your country’s lofty status in the world. For the sake of the
glory of the great American people and the reputation of a legion of American
corporations, in order to safeguard your country’s lofty status in the world and
protect the intellectual property rights of your country and other nations in
the world, we humbly request you and your government to prevent DuPont’s such
extremely brazen infringement and even seizure behaviors, and force DuPont to
carry out it’s voluntarily promised obligations in the agreement. We firmly
believe that the United State is not a country that shields and connives at
rascals and the American government is not a government that shields and
connives at rascals; Under the instruction of our respectable Mr. President and
the Americangovernment, the rascal of DuPont shall be aware of shame and be able
to turn into a normal corporation by giving up shameless behaviors. Due to the
adequate evidences, the clear-cut rights and obligations of both parties of
DuPont and Mr. Huang, and simple legal relations, the infringement of the
intellectual property rights of Mr. Huang by DuPont can be absolutely prevented
and DuPont will surely disburse Mr. Huang patent fee, license fee or equivalent
“Utter Compensation” fee as long as your government intensifies the law
enforcement strength to protect intellectual property rights as well.
With
best regards!
Annex:
Heartfelt thanks for your reading my E-mail and your mail of attention to
this matter. I would like to make some replenishment concerning the matter, for
you to judge and decide.
I Abstract
1. At the request of Du Pont, Mr. Huang has for 10 times
submitted written technical materials to Du Pont from April 1993 to 1994, for
expert group of Du Pont to conduct feasibility analysis.
2. On February 22,
1995, Dr Robert F Sklar, Technology Transfer Licensing Manager of DuPont arrived
in Shanghai in China, to “sign many agreements” with Mr. Huang. Mr. Huang
insisted DuPont examines samples first before signs any agreement. However, as
samples were still in the process of purification at the time, no agreements
were signed then.
3. On March 28, 1995, Mr. Huang sent the first batch of
samples to Du Pont by post.
4. On September 7, 1995, Mr. Huang received
“Biological Evaluation Agreement” (1995 Agreement) sent by Du Pont, requiring
Mr. Huang to sign this agreement and again provide samples. Mr. Huang signed the
agreement and sent second batch of samples as requested by DuPont.
DuPont
admit in Article 5 of the “1995 Agreement” that Mr. Huang will be entitled to
claim patent and licensing fees. DuPont states in Article 8 of the “1995
Agreement” that Mr. Huang may not cooperate with any universities or enterprises
in any form before and after signing of this agreement (for this reason, Mr.
Huang has refused cooperation request of several companies).
5. On September
10, 1998, DuPont sent a letter to Mr. Huang, asking for third batch of samples.
6. In 1999, DuPont carried out a month-long insecticide screening on the
third batch of samples (in fact, it has carried out weeds killing test and mould
killing test in the meantime), and required to keep all these tests a secret.
7. On June 8, 2000, DuPont sent a letter saying it was not interested in
samples provided by Mr. Huang, and refused to pay Mr. Huang patent and licensing
fees.
8.The mail signed by DuPont on June 2th, 2005, threaten Mr.Huang ,and
prevent Mr.Huang send the
E-mail.
Seek response from E-mail: info@dupont.com
http://www1.dupont.com/NASApp/dupontglobal/corp/contactEmail.jsp
info.china@chn.dupont.com
是谁让他、她和它蒙受耻辱？是无耻的美国杜邦和贺利得!
无耻，无赖，美国杜邦!
无耻，无赖，美国杜邦总裁贺利得!
美国杜邦和贺利得是强横无耻型的跨国级的无赖!
美国杜邦不敢公开否认,就是公开承认自己是强横无耻型的跨国级的无赖公司!
1 美国杜邦及其总裁Holliday敢公开否认吗？不敢，绝对不敢！因为我未捏造任何事实。
2
如果大家都像美国杜邦及其总裁Holliday这样极其无耻地公开践踏法律和公开挑衅全世界文明法制国家的话，世界将是一个怎样的世界
？逻辑很简单，既然美国杜邦及其总裁Holliday以这些极其无耻、无赖的行为在全世界公众面前公开践踏《合同法》强占别人的专利而受到支持，为甚么其他人在全世界公众面前公开践踏《刑法》而杀人、抢劫不可能受到鼓励？
3
由于《"1995年协议"》中保密条款的规定，我和黄先生不能公开我们的真实姓名，但是美国杜邦及其总裁Holliday绝对知道我们的真实姓名，敬请谅解。
SXF 2006.07.01.
敬致美国总统布什先生的公开信
说明：
美国杜邦化学公司近一年来，多次要求将杜邦和我方的争议提请仲裁机关裁决。我方尊重杜邦这一要求，在2006.01.16.给杜邦公司用挂号信寄去了《仲
裁协议》版本。并附信说，杜邦如无异议，请杜邦在30天内签字、盖章后，保留一份，将其余二份寄回。杜邦如有异议，请提出杜邦的版本。并在
2006.01.26.,2006.02.06.，2006.02.10.，2006.02.15.，将此《仲裁协议》和信件24次发送给了info.china@chn.dupont.com和info@dupont.com。但是现在已经超过了30天，即已经远远超过了作出论证和决定的必要时间，仍无任何答复。这很可能是杜邦企图继续赖帐的又一恶作剧表演，故发此e-mail麻烦各位，敬请谅解。如有可能，敬请您教育和强制杜邦不要继续玩这种赖帐的恶作剧表演了。
我们坚信，美国不是一个包庇和纵容无赖的国家，美国政府不是一个包庇和纵容无赖的政府。
我们敬请美国政府加强知识产权保护的执法力度，强制杜邦履行在协议中主动承诺的义务。
*************************************************************************************************
尊敬的布什总统先生，您好！
杜邦公司不履行协议的事实已多次通过president@whitehouse.gov向您呈述；president@whitehouse.gov也在
2004年9月代替总统先生发来下述三封内容相同的回信：“Thank you for e-mailing President Bush. Your ideas
and comments are very important to him.”我的“ideas and
comments”是黄先生有充足的事实证据与无可辩驳的法律依据证明，杜邦必须向黄先生支付专利费、许可证费或等额的“完全赔偿”金，杜邦一直拒绝支付这些费用是侵犯黄先生的知识产权。president@whitehouse.gov说“are very
important to him.”
“very important”对总统先生是何含意，我不敢妄自猜测；但就愚见而言，有下列“important”
。
1.尊敬的总统先生和总统先生领导的美国政府以及伟大的美国人民对靠盗窃、靠耍无赖等无耻方法掠夺别人的知识产权深恶痛绝，而杜邦却正在干此无耻、无赖的勾当。
2.
贵国在各种领域拥有的知识产权数量都远远超过世界任何一个国家，深受侵权之害。因此，历来的贵国政府都不遗余力敦促世界其他国家加强保护贵国知识产权的执
法力度。但就在贵国政府不遗余力敦促中国政府加强保护贵国知识产权的执法力度并得到您“感到鼓舞”的赞尝时，杜邦却用各种极其无耻的无赖手段侵犯黄先生
的知识产权，这对世界其他国家的政府和公众将是一个极坏的信号，对现行和潜在的知识产权窃贼将是一个极“好”的榜样，对贵国政府保护贵国知识产权的工作是一个极大的破坏，对贵国在世界上崇高地位是一个极大的耻辱。
为了伟大美国人民的光荣，为了众多美国公司的声誉，为了保卫贵国在世界上的崇高地位，为了保护贵国和世
界其他国家知识产权，敬请您和您的政府阻止杜邦的这种极其无耻的侵犯甚至强占行为，强制杜邦履行在协议
中主动承诺的义务。
我们坚信，美国不是一个包庇和纵容无赖的国家，美国政府不是一个包庇和纵容无赖的政府；杜邦这个无赖在
尊敬的总统先生和美国政府的教育下，是会懂得羞耻的，是能够改掉无赖行为成为一个正常的公司的。
由于事实证据充足，杜邦和黄先生双方的权利和义务明确，法律关系简单，所以只要贵国政府也加强知识产权
保护的执法力度，杜邦公司对黄先生的知识产权的侵犯是完全可以阻止的，杜邦公司肯定会向黄先生支付专利费、许可证费或等额的“完全赔偿”金的。
此致
最崇高的敬礼！
全责代理人： SXF 2005.09.17.23：59
摘要
1.
从1993年4月起到1994年，黄先生应杜邦要求，向杜邦提供了近10次文字技术资料，供杜邦专家组进行
可行性分析。
2.
1995年2月22日杜邦技术转让与许可证经理Sklar博士 （E.I.DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY Robert
F.
Sklar Ph. D. Manager,Technology Transfer
Licensing)来中国上海，要与黄先生“签订许多协议”。黄先生坚持要在让杜邦看了样品后再签协议，而当时样品尚在提纯过程中，故未签协议。
3
1995年3月28日黄先生向杜邦寄出了第壹批样品。
4. 1995年9月7日黄先生收到杜邦寄来的《BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION
AGREEMENT（1995年协议)》，要求黄先生签署此协议并再提供样品。黄先生按杜邦要求署了此协议并向杜邦寄出了第贰批样品。杜邦在《1995年
协议》第5条中向黄先生主动承诺，黄先生将有提取专利费、许可证费的权利。杜邦在《1995年协议》第8条中规定，黄先生不得与任何大学或企业作任何合作
（黄先生为此而谢绝了几家公司要求合作的 请求）。
5. 1998年9月10日杜邦发信向黄先生要到了第叁批样品。
6 1999年杜邦对第叁批样品进行一个多月的Insecticide
Screening（际实上，同时进行了杂草杀灭试验和霉菌杀灭试验。杜邦要求对这些试验全部保密）。
7.
2000年6月8日杜邦发信称对黄先生的样品不感兴趣,拒绝向黄先生支付专利费和特许证费。 8.2005.06.02.
杜邦签署信件，对黄先生进行威胁-恫吓，阻止黄先生发此E-mail。
(求证E-mail：杜邦中国 info.china@chn.dupont.com ,
杜邦总部Contact Us:info@dupont.com
http://www1.dupont.com/NASApp/dupontglobal/corp/contactEmail.jsp)