[Stoves] New US Patent law change

[Carefreeland at aol.com]

In a message dated 9/9/2011 12:13:29 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
crispinpigott at gmail.com writes:
 
DD: Dan Dimiduk comments

Dear Jan 
That is a very interesting  point. The usual problem with that is it really 
relies as a strategy for  success on the public (and competitors) remaining 
 ignorant. 
Garth Foxcroft used to invent  things that were probably going to be 
discovered by someone in the field  sooner or later, and not having the money to 
patent everything he thought of,  would make detailed notes and get it date 
stamped somehow (not that old one  about posting yourself a letter, much 
better, with a lawyer). When the  solution was inevitably achieved by someone 
else, he would wait until they  developed the market a bit – perhaps two 
years. Then he would show up with his  ‘prior art’ folder and say, “You know, 
your patent (rendering exclusivity) is  not really valid but I can be 
convinced to keep quiet about  it.” 
I understand that the tactic  now falls away. The avowed purpose of the 
change in the law is to speed up  invention and commerce. It might do that I 
guess. 
Regards 
Crispin


DD : I have just picked up on this conversation because I've been busy  
getting ready to move the business. Last night I was shocked when I heard the  
President mention patent law changes. If what you say is true then we are 
back  to using AK - 47's to defend our patent rights. This to me is an even 
worse  system because it throws all the power into the hands of the patent 
office,  those who can hire the most expensive lawyers and file the most paper. 
    That means that while I develop a project, that I  need to post a guard 
or be a guard so no one breaks into my facility and steals  a look at my 
work before I file the patent. Maybe booby traps and land mines  will be ok if 
they kill or capture the thief for disposal before he gets away.  Some 
projects need years even decades to improve to make them successful. Under  this 
new system, an inventor must constantly update his patents as the work  
progresses. The companies like Halliburton that make a living filing as many  
patents as possible on everything will prosper. I see few upsides to this 
law. 
    What am I missing here? What happened to prior art  being king? Let's 
just ditch the whole patent office or ignore it and the  lawsuits that 
follow. This upgraded patent process does even more to kill the  small inventors 
it was designed to protect.  AK -47's and hit men will take  care of nasty 
infringement suits. Law of the jungle will prevail. Personally,  I'm taking up 
axe and knife making and throwing, It's quieter ;-) . 
    I rest my case, 
        Dan Dimiduk  
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110909/a4abebea/attachment.html>