Inventing Is No Longer Optional
in [Basics]
|
Prev: Quirky old LCD
Next: Snubber for triac light switch?
From: John Fields on 4 Feb 2010 19:46 On Wed, 3 Feb 2010 08:23:20 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill <BretCahill(a)peoplepc.com> wrote: >Whenever some idiot on a science or tech tries to bluff he is more >worthwhile than Al Gore in a dust devil, just ask him for his patent >numbers. > >Inventing is no longer optional. > > >Bret Cahill --- He fancies himself an inventor, a lover of science, a mentor. A seeker of truth, but it's clear from his tooth, that he's only an abject dissenter. JF
From: Bret Cahill on 4 Feb 2010 22:10 > > > Whenever some idiot on a science or tech tries to bluff he is more > > > worthwhile than Al Gore in a dust devil, just ask him for his patent > > > numbers. > > > > Inventing is no longer optional. > > > > Bret Cahill > > > One problem for us whose work was largely on DOD contracts, the > > government automatically owned all the work and discoveries. Ended up > > with zero patents when I retired. Hope that doesn't mean my work had > > zero value. On the other hand, another figure of merit is list of > > published papers. Have a fair number of those, since there are > > classified journals. > > I can relate to that. I worked for the Navy and the CIA on various > clandestine "gadgets" over the years none of which ever got patented. I have > one, count 'em, one patent to my name and that was for a capacitive coupling > device that to me seemed totally obvious and unworthy of a patent. You might > say I reinvented the capacitor! Yet the patent office granted a patent on > it. Many patents are absurd these days, its about money, not invention and > even a bent piece of wire may garner a patent depending on the claims. There > are several perpetual motion patents as ridiculous as that is. There is no > requirement that a patent works. There just isn't all that much of an intersection between justice and the law. Still you need to _try_ to make it work. Bret Cahill
From: Paul E. Schoen on 5 Feb 2010 04:17 "John Fields" <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote in message news:1fnmm5t5spf2qkdoatkd8gasg8c1tighpd(a)4ax.com... > On Wed, 3 Feb 2010 08:23:20 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill > <BretCahill(a)peoplepc.com> wrote: > >>Whenever some idiot on a science or tech tries to bluff he is more >>worthwhile than Al Gore in a dust devil, just ask him for his patent >>numbers. >> >>Inventing is no longer optional. >> >> >>Bret Cahill > > --- > He fancies himself an inventor, > a lover of science, a mentor. > A seeker of truth, > but it's clear from his tooth, > that he's only an abject dissenter. Yes, after enough out-venting, in-venting becomes necessary. Here is an invention that addresses outventing: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5969272.html BTW, here's mine: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4307345.html I have designed better and more innovative devices since then. But it usually doesn't really pay to patent ideas. The legal costs for my patent were borne by the company I worked for, and they paid me a ceremonial $1 for it, although later they gave me a more substantial bonus. Paul
From: Pete Verdon on 5 Feb 2010 15:47
Don Stauffer wrote: > One problem for us whose work was largely on DOD contracts, the > government automatically owned all the work and discoveries. Ended up > with zero patents when I retired. The company I work for owns all my work-related ideas, but the patent still has my name on as inventor (as distinct from owner). Pete |