New simplifying approach -- beams

Yours and mine. This is where you can gas on about how you think the universe works. To a point, after that we'll expect you to actually test your stuff and report.

Re: New simplifying approach -- beams

Postby Doug Coulter » Fri Jul 01, 2011 3:21 pm

I'm afraid you're in error on that. Working is no longer required to patent, and as in the cases of SCO, or Paul Allen vs world, or Oracle vs Google, you need millions of bucks and years to get a patent thrown out, no matter how much obvious prior art there is. This will fly right through -- anything will, even Apple's patent on a rectangle with rounded corners for a phone did. Or Microsofts patent on using XOR to exchange two variables without a temp, or IBM's on using a laser to entertain your cat (which at least, actually works).

And this guy appears to have just read this in a paper (which I recall is in our library someplace -- maybe almost a decade old) and patented the work of some others, no reference to their work (which was government funded) by just saying "for fusion" on the end.

Finding prior art is all on the guy trying to get the patent, so they just skip that step. Our patent office is now self funding off fees, so they really have no reason not to pass anything.
There are patents on faster than light propulsion, phasers, antigravity, you name it out there, obviously no working model has been required (I think that law went out around WWII or so).

In the US there's a court system in Texas that is especially friendly to patent holders, so all the trolls file in that one, and that alone costs a challenger a year (at least, if the troll has a lawer that knows how to get endless delays, which is easy), legal fees, and trips to Texas to fight it.

I look at and post on groklaw.org (I'm DCFusor on most of the rest of the 'net), which has usually several of these decade-long fights over patent trolls running at any given time. They've helped the good guys win a time or two, as there are a lot of experts there that know prior art and obviousness -- usually just after the good guy goes bankrupt or dies of old age anyway.

Look at what happened SCO vs Novell -- both are gone now, but only after 50 million in fees paid to the legal profession. Paul Allen (Interval) thinks they've patented the internet, in essence, and it's already been a year on that one. Google is being sued by Oracle for using a runtime engine in android that will "eat" translated Java (which Oracle tried to get Sun to open source the rest of the way before Oracle bought Sun). All costs in the millions already, and all "patently ridiculous" from the get go.

You could also look into the submarine patent on bar codes and the extortion that guy pulled for a decade -- having the patent granted AFTER everyone was using it, due to a tricky filing and delay process. So no one could even know they were infringing till this guy comes out of the woodwork and demands billions from all the chain stores -- and gets it....
Posting as just me, not as the forum owner. Everything I say is "in my opinion" and YMMV -- which should go for everyone without saying.
User avatar
Doug Coulter
 
Posts: 2964
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2010 8:05 pm
Location: Floyd county, VA, USA

Previous

Return to Theories and speculations

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest