The Patent Application Process - UK

[daxwc]

Do they have a “Most Deluded Crank Award�?

[Grimer]

If they have, could you like to nominate me for it, please? :-)

[daxwc]

I can’t due to conflict of interest as I have several concepts myself, only difference is I am not sure they will work. Does that mean you are a more likely to win or does the most obvious non-runner win?

[Grimer]

I'm sure I would win as I am 100% deluded.

As a matter of fact your post reminded me of a non PC book I read many years ago about an Aussie who travelled round the country doing various soul destroying jobs.


(available on Amazon, UK, for one penny)


In it there is a very memorable piece of doggerel which I shall bowdlerize.

There goes the happy deluded crank,
He doesn't give a damn,
I wish I was a deluded crank,
My god! Perhaps I am.

[FunWithGravity2]

You have presumed incorrectly Frank,

Some may not care about patenting. Along with numerous other reasons why you have not seen anyone yet disclose what "you" believe to be a working principle.

The above video from youtube(consider the source) is advertising propaganda from accompany that wants people to use their service. While what they say is true their are far more complex issues that could change "effective dates of priority" that could come into play.

If Jack and Jane were colleagues, or even just random strangers that happened to meet at a party. If Jack gleaned most of his information from a conversation with Jane or even if he just randomly accidentally walked into a room and was lucky enough to catch a glimpse at her design. Jack cannot rush out and file a patent. Hopefully Jane would have protected her idea with documentation showing that she had been working on it and that it was "stolen" by the "jack come lately" First to patent was designed to help get ideas brought forward faster and easier for the small entity, but certainly does not provide "first to file status" to entities that "stole" the idea. Although i have not yet seem a major ruling since implemented that has tested the laws yet, I assume time will eventually bring forth a large enough one with money on both sides that will duke it out.

IMHO if the parties in question can draw any reasonable conclusion that the offending party had any ability to access their research they will be able to argue the antiquated "first to invent" on grounds it was stolen from them.

But who cares right?

Crazy Dave

Very interesting, Dave.

Does my publishing the principle of the Gravity Pulse Motor - Mark 5 on the BesslerWheel forum mean that no one can patent it? I do hope so. :-)

Incidentally, I believe you are one of the people best equipped to build a working model. The biggest problem is probably getting a hight COR (coefficient of restitution). I wonder if some combination of neodymium magnets in repulsion would work best.

Finding suitable one way clutches shouldn't be difficult, albeit expensive.

One thing for sure. The first person to build a physical demonstration of the the gravitational wind being harnessed is a shoe in for a Nobel Prize.

Strangely enough frank its a valid point, i have often considered. with all the hypothetical babbling and dreaming you do on various methods with such conviction, how will that effect anyone that miht find the answer along the same approach eventually.

IMHO it will be the same as the patents for fusion reactors that power spaceships. Since nothing was produced or came of it and you never followed it to fruition your "hypothesizing" would be considered babblings off a mad man. Your downfall to being taken seriously if will be your "jumping on the bandwagon" with every theoretical concept with your famous "now i see".

"now you see?"

Crazy Dave

incidentaly so do I :)

[Trevor Lyn Whatford]

Do they have a “Most Deluded Crank Award�?

Ironically that title could end up going to the most hardened skeptic, and believers that know physics is correct and is empirically tested, and preaches the same!

[raj]

Is there a case for scrapping 'Patents' altogether?

If yes, there goes people's intellectual property rights!

If no, let those who want to apply for patents do so.

Where's the problem?

[Grimer]

You have presumed incorrectly Frank,

Some may not care about patenting. Along with numerous other reasons why you have not seen anyone yet disclose what "you" believe to be a working principle.

The above video from youtube(consider the source) is advertising propaganda from accompany that wants people to use their service. While what they say is true their are far more complex issues that could change "effective dates of priority" that could come into play.

If Jack and Jane were colleagues, or even just random strangers that happened to meet at a party. If Jack gleaned most of his information from a conversation with Jane or even if he just randomly accidentally walked into a room and was lucky enough to catch a glimpse at her design. Jack cannot rush out and file a patent. Hopefully Jane would have protected her idea with documentation showing that she had been working on it and that it was "stolen" by the "jack come lately" First to patent was designed to help get ideas brought forward faster and easier for the small entity, but certainly does not provide "first to file status" to entities that "stole" the idea. Although i have not yet seem a major ruling since implemented that has tested the laws yet, I assume time will eventually bring forth a large enough one with money on both sides that will duke it out.

IMHO if the parties in question can draw any reasonable conclusion that the offending party had any ability to access their research they will be able to argue the antiquated "first to invent" on grounds it was stolen from them.

But who cares right?

Crazy Dave

...
Does my publishing the principle of the Gravity Pulse Motor - Mark 5 on the BesslerWheel forum mean that no one can patent it? I do hope so. :-)
...

Strangely enough Frank it's a valid point, I have often considered. With all the hypothetical babbling and dreaming you do on various methods with such conviction, how will that effect anyone that might find the answer along the same approach eventually.

IMHO it will be the same as the patents for fusion reactors that power spaceships. Since nothing was produced or came of it and you never followed it to fruition your "hypothesizing" would be considered babblings of a mad man. Your downfall to being taken seriously will be your "jumping on the bandwagon" with every theoretical concept with your famous "now i see".

"now you see?"

Crazy Dave

incidentally so do I :)

"Babbling and dreaming", eh! :-)

Yeah - well. Fair point.

I agree that without a working model of the GPM 5 one can't be sure there's not a flaw in the argument - albeit that, unlike the case of the GPM Mark 3, no one has produced a Mark 5 show stopper.

However, there is some slight chance someone capable of understand the logic of the design and competent as a builder will recognise its Newcomen simplicity and succeed in achieving reset.

From a logical point of view one doesn't even have to do that. One merely has to reach a condition where the compound pendulum picks up the simple pendulum with a non-zero velocity.

[Ed]

Is there a case for scrapping 'Patents' altogether?

If yes, there goes people's intellectual property rights!

If no, let those who want to apply for patents do so.

Where's the problem?

The problem is many people dream up things they think will work without a prototype and then rush off to the patent office, meanwhile someone who actually can make that product ultimately can't or won't bring it to market because they have lost the incentive.

These days civilization is always 27 years away from the next breakthrough.