<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns:o = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.18928"></HEAD>
<BODY style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" id=role_body
bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 rightMargin=7 topMargin=7><FONT id=role_document
color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial>
<DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 9/9/2011 12:13:29 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
crispinpigott@gmail.com writes:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>DD: Dan Dimiduk comments</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px"><FONT
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" color=#1f497d size=2 face=Calibri>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: #1f497d">Dear Jan<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: #1f497d"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: #1f497d">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.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: #1f497d"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: #1f497d">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.”<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: #1f497d"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: #1f497d">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.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: #1f497d"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: #1f497d">Regards<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="COLOR: #1f497d">Crispin<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV>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. </DIV>
<DIV> 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.
</DIV>
<DIV> 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 ;-) . </DIV>
<DIV> I rest my case, </DIV>
<DIV> Dan Dimiduk </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>