Hi Folks!
John sent this to my email alone and I think he
intended it for the list...
Note: forwarded message attached.
=====
=================================
Please respond to jdecker@keelynet.com
as I am writing from my work email of
jwdatwork@yahoo.com.........thanks!
=================================
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
--0-1957747793-947726837=:11299
Content-Type: message/rfc822
X-Apparently-To: jwdatwork@yahoo.com via web2005.mail.yahoo.com
X-Track2: 2
X-Track: 1: 40
Received: from klingon.netkonect.co.uk (HELO klingon.netkonect.net) (194.62.44.61)
by mta221.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 10 Jan 2000 19:28:42 -0000
Received: from jcollins (jcollins.netkonect.co.uk [194.164.148.207])
by klingon.netkonect.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA11122
for <jwdatwork@yahoo.com> Mon, 10 Jan 2000 19:29:52 GMT
Message-Id: <200001101929.TAA11122@klingon.netkonect.net>
From: "John Collins" <jcollins@free-energy.co.uk>
To: Jerry Wayne Decker <jwdatwork@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 19:27:07 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: Quoted-printable
Subject: Re: patents & public domain
Priority: normal
In-reply-to: <20000110141044.4431.qmail@web2005.mail.yahoo.com>
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01d)
Content-Length: 5791
Hi Jerry and all,
I am really pleased to see this topic aired, it has been on my mind
for several months. I'm sure that the majority of people think I'm on
a hiding to nothing but I have been thinking about how I, or anyone
else for that matter, should deal with it, if we should succeed in
duplicating Bessler's wheel.
The same problem applies to all who are working on anything with
similar ramifications. Do I patent it and then give it away publicly,
so that I ensure that no one else gets to patent it? Or do I just
publish and be dammed? Does patenting such a device draw
unwelcome attention from those who would seek to bury it? If I just
put it into the public domain will this be sufficient to protect it
against the likes of "Dickers"? What an apt name BTW.
I know this is a question that haunts all who work on new ideas
because of the numerous emails I get on the subject. I would like
to see what others have to say on the matter.
John
> Hi Folks!
>
> I have been having 'discussions' over the years with
> various associates, regarding the idea of NOT
> patenting free energy or gravity control discoveries,
>
> with the idealistic and utopian BELIEF that they could
> be freely shared with all and
>
> BECAUSE they had been released in the public domain,
> they would NOT BE PATENTABLE.
>
> This would prevent any person or company from
> attempting to patent it as their own for the purpose
> of controlling use or making undeserved money from
> research they never did and should never be allowed to
> profit by or control.
>
> I just heard a discussion on the radio about a guy
> named Dickers or something like that who claims to
> have come up with a simple Y2K fix, patented it and is
> now going after many big companies trying to recover.
>
>
> These big companies under attack by this 'inventor'
> say the information has long been public and he has no
> right to any recovery because they never even heard of
> him or 'his' fix. They also say that because the
> information has long been public from many sources
> (one comment said 30 earlier, public versions existed
> long before this guy came along), it could not be
> patented. This was on Public Radio..on 01/10/99 about
> 6:45AM in Dallas.
>
> Now one of my friends says the 'inventor' has up to a
> year after making any announcement, publicly or
> otherwise to apply for the patent.
>
> I checked on it and found the following information
> directly from the horse's mouth, the US Patent Office;
>
> http://www.uspto.gov/patft/
>
> The fact that an invention cannot be found by
> searching in the PTO's patent databases does not mean
> that the invention is patentable. Both of the PTO's
> patent databases begin with patents granted since
> 1976. A complete patentability search must consider
> all prior art, including earlier patents, foreign
> patents and NON-PATENT LITERATURE.
>
> http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/doc/general/novelty.htm
>
> In order for an invention to be patentable it must be
> new as defined in the patent law, which provides that
> an invention cannot be patented if: =93
>
> (a) the invention was known or used by others in this
> country, or patented or described in a printed
> publication in this or a foreign country, before the
> invention thereof by the applicant for patent,=94 or
>
> =93(b) the invention was patented or described in a
> printed publication in this or a foreign country or in
> public use or on sale in this country more than one
> year prior to the application for patent in the United
> States . . .=94
>
> If the invention has been described in a printed
> publication anywhere in the world, or if it has been
> in public use or on sale in this country before the
> date that the applicant made his/her invention, a
> patent cannot be obtained.
>
> If the invention has been described in a printed
> publication anywhere, or has been in public use or on
> sale in this country more than one year before the
> date on which an application for patent is filed in
> this country, a patent cannot be obtained.
>
> In this connection it is immaterial when the invention
> was made, or whether the printed publication or public
> use was by the inventor himself/herself or by someone
> else.
>
> If the inventor describes the invention in a printed
> publication or uses the invention publicly, or places
> it on sale, he/she must apply for a patent before one
> year has gone by, otherwise any right to a patent will
> be lost.
> ------------------------
> An interesting dichotomy. If the invention has been
> described in a printed publication (internet and
> public email would be included) for more than one
> year, the device becomes unpatentable.
>
> How deep does DESCRIBED go? Construction details,
> operational overview or instructions, description of
> what it does or how it does it?
>
> Any comments?
>
>
>
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
>
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> Please respond to jdecker@keelynet.com
> as I am writing from my work email of
> jwdatwork@yahoo.com.........thanks!
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://im.yahoo.com
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> To leave this list, email <listserver@keelynet.com>
> with the body text: leave Interact
> list archives and on line subscription forms are at
> http://keelynet.com/interact/
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
--0-1957747793-947726837=:11299--
-------------------------------------------------------------
To leave this list, email <listserver@keelynet.com>
with the body text: leave Interact
list archives and on line subscription forms are at
http://keelynet.com/interact/
-------------------------------------------------------------