I had actually planned on protecting it so no-one else could shelve it, but
allowing free use with the possiblilty of a voluntary lisence fee, listing
the "complying entities" on a website so the public is encouraged to buy
products from them instead of the ones who want to keep it all, including
that half-percent or so..... or something along those lines. Which is why I
immediately joined this group when i read your shareware concept.
FAR too often the really good ideas get bought and stuck on a shelf
somewhere because big business has an interest in the status-quo. THIS is
the worst kind of inhibition I can think of. Slowing the progress of
humanity in the interest of commerce? WHY? How many concepts have been
stuffed because someone would lose money if they were brought to light. A
hypothetical question, of course, but just the THOUGHT of over-unity must
bring chills to the oil cartel.
I saw a show on the discovery channel a while back about the X-ray and how
the inventor had 'given' it to humanity, no patents, no lisence, nothing.
Then had his family destroy all his notes when he died so science couldnt
cut his work apart for being "less-than" they expected. I identified with
him all too well.
I have been thinking it would be wise to burn a cd with all my data on it,
or rather, several, and send them to myself, certified mail.. the standard
mini-copyright process right? (as well as a few to selected other people,
for safe keeping) just to prove a date, etc. I also have plenty of video
footage from demonstrations including the Chief-Of-Staff of the State Atty.
Generals office and another gentleman who passed away several years ago,
done in a building that was leveled quite a while ago as well. This seems a
fairly solid way to prove these things.
Its the thought that someone ELSE could potentially patent it and lock it
up before anybody finds out about it that gets my goat. This absolutely
MUST be able to be avoided. I really dont care if I cant patent it as long
as nobody else can. Having a valid patent would, of course, prevent anyone
from doing this but if all they have to do is swear an oath and then nobody
finds out about it until the patent is granted, we are S.O.L. right? and we
cant exactly go drop $75 every time we make an advancement in our work,
that would be DAILY. I was looking forward to posting my progress as it
happens, on my site, like JLN and many others, and knowing that it would
all be safe from being stolen.. or.. something like that.
If that is our goal wouldnt it serve to just publish and disclose and then
what? We cant exactly watch the patents that are filed to see if anybody
tries to steal it before it is considered public domain? how do we prevent
it? Is there some way to make sure the patent office checks a particular
website for publicly disclosed ideas before granting a patent? That would
seem to be a solution of sorts.
Im sure your ideas and/or solutions will be sufficient but I still dont
think i am going to sleep very well tonite.
OK enough spam out of me.
Thanks again
Adrian
At 12:37 AM 3/30/00 -0600, Jerry W. Decker wrote:
>Hi Adrian et al!
>
>Well, we all live and learn...I was simply floored when I
>found out about this having been done by someone in our
>group and am now considering steps to make sure it cannot
>happen again...at the least, MINIMIZE the possibility of it.
>
>The question as I see it, is the invention being worked on
>for the public good and without any REQUIREMENT of financial
>payback or reward,
>
>OR, is it just a 'pure science' experiment to learn and pass
>on something new that will add to the pool of knowledge and
>hopefully lead to practical applications, ideally developed
>and marketed by many worldwide (which will result in more
>options, more competition, cheaper units, look at the
>digital watch, used to be $200 for an LED display, now $5
>for LCD)?
>
>I can understand an inventor spending time and money on a
>project with the expectation of patent protection that will
>provide future income each time one of the units is sold,
>thats business.
>
>This utopian idea, flawed as it may be, offers the hope that
>the inventor or more precisely the discoverer would be
>associated with it and be offered all kinds of opportunities
>and awards of appreciation, some with monetary awards.
>
>On investigation, it turns out most of the highly successful
>'perpetual' large nonprofits own land and real estate,
>research and develop inventions and technologies and have
>all kinds of income producing investments and activities
>which sustains their growth, their charities, their trusts
>as well as their overhead and salaries.
>
>So WHY NOT setup a nonprofit specifically to investigate
>alternative science technologies, both as 'pure science'
>that is freely given AND commercial technologies that allow
>it to self-sustain without having to rely on contributions.
>
>It is because of this that I was and am concerned about the
>two most important foci of KeelyNet, free energy/overunity
>and gravity control followed closely by electronic and
>energetic health methods. It would be totally pathetic and
>ironic if all this non-paid effort, exclusively given and
>expected to benefit humanity,
>led to all kinds of experimentation that was freely
>released, then patented by some unscrupulous person or
>company to lock it all up or reap rewards by selling or
>marketing that which they simply were first to patent.
>
>There is no question we will protect our interests through
>non disclosure for commercial devices, but WHEN we get the
>basic proof of principle for overunity, no matter which form
>it takes (and there will be many variations), AND how to
>alter gravity in a device or local area, we must insure that
>it cannot be stolen, locked up or otherwise suppressed.
>
>Glad someone else out there sees the point of this....I
>should have checked into it a lot more and have to varying
>degrees in the past but it was this revelation that one of
>us had cheated that brought it home.
>
>What is interesting is that 'public disclosure' doesn't have
>to be hundreds or thousands of people....it could just be a
>pamphlet mailed out or given to a few people....most won't
>do anything with it anyway but even less risk would be
>incurred by limiting the release to just a few trusted
>contacts, even family.
>
>In your case, it is purely commercial which is not a
>problem, so I'd certainly not post any details or even
>description of operation, that revealed anything
>significant....a teaser page with an announced approximate
>date of release might be useful as it could draw in
>investors who you could have sign a non-disclosure prior to
>even discussing it with them, let alone demonstrating a
>working model.
>
>CYA and protect your interests and ideals, that's what its
>about.
>
>
>Adrian Knotts wrote:
>>
>> Thank you JERRY!!!
>>
>> I find myself reeling in disbelief after reading this and subsequent links.
>>
>> Am I the only one who was under the impression that public disclosure
>> granted a right to file ( or release to public domain ) on the invention
>> for the following year?
>>
>> I am fairly new to this list and though I have not been participating I
>> have been following closely while finishing up on many years of work. I was
>> preparing for disclosure and filing and now it appears that I have to
>> completely change my course of action. I have been converting my notes to
>> html, making video captures and actually finding myself having to re-do
>> some experiments because I either cant find the film or forgot to take
>> pictures. Looks like my website will NOT be going up as planned and once i
>> get my heart rate back to normal I will just thank God that jerry is
>> on-the-ball.
>>
>> This information comes "not a minute too soon" too.
>>
>> There HAS to be a way for people to work together through a medium like
>> this while not "tipping their hand" to those who would steal their ideas. I
>> have felt a real tinge of fear about openly telling the whole world about
>> my work, as I am sure others have felt, but would really like a forum for
>> discussion. The result has been a passive approach to co-operative research
>> which, even though I doubt I could have helped many people much I sure
>> would have liked to bounce ideas off a group such as this.
>>
>> You all have my deepest respect for your work and devotion (and I know,
>> first hand, what its like to spend years working toward one goal)
>>
>> I had a finance source who appears to have found other priorities more
>> spectacular than my simple work and may well not be willing to follow
>> through the patent process with me. Of course I want to think my work is
>> suitable for marketing and may make a difference in this world but they
>> appear to be just dropping the ball even though I have already recieved
>> some funding from them and I am asking myself another question? maybe you
>> can help?
>
>If you have your website, that would be great to just post a
>basic description of what your device does, but not how,
>unless that description might lead people to thinking about
>how to do the same thing....but it might draw in investors.
>
>> Does the contribution of funds towards developing a "next generation"
>> prototype grant the contributor any special rights? Assuming
>> proof-of-concept has already been accomplished.
>
>You'd have to talk with a lawyer about that. As I
>understand it, unless there is a specific contract granting
>a percentage of proceeds from an invention or activity, then
>you simply would owe the amount of money invested as a
>'loan', but a lawyer would certainly be able to write up
>specific contracts that both parties agree to.
>
>> And, for general information, what if it hasnt? Does someone who gives you
>> money to prove a concept own any part of the concept?
>>
>> Sorry to add more questions to this maze-of-a-topic but I need to develop
>> another strategy now and im not quite sure which direction to go.
>>
>> Thx
>> Adrian Knotts
>
>--
> KeelyNet - From an Art to a Science
> Jerry W. Decker - http://www.keelynet.com/
>discussion archives http://www.escribe.com/science/keelynet/
>KeelyNet - PO BOX 870716 - Mesquite, TX 75187 - 214.324.8741
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> 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/
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
-------------------------------------------------------------
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/
-------------------------------------------------------------