Cookies-law

Cookies help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
http://www.overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please leave this website now. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

Poplamp

poplamp

CCTool

CCTool

LEDTVforSale

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

OverUnity Book

overunity principles book

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 489664
  • *Total Topics: 14413
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 3
  • *Guests: 249
  • *Total: 252

Facebook

Author Topic: Open Source Vs. Patenting  (Read 113426 times)

Offline omnispace

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 27
Re: Open Source Vs. Patenting
« Reply #60 on: January 24, 2008, 04:38:43 PM »
And so If I were to share with this forum, could say a company or corp. use it as it would now be out in the open?

Maybe, but remember, all (or most) patents on file with the patent office can be viewed freely.  They are "out in the open", and there's not much you could do if some company in China / 3rd world country decided to infringe your patent.

If you wrote up a license agreement, it could be specific for certain people on the forum.  That way you could decide who could legally use the device (at least in countries that with strong IP enforcement).  I suppose a company could create a forum persona, and you wouldn't know if they were a real person or not.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Open Source Vs. Patenting
« Reply #60 on: January 24, 2008, 04:38:43 PM »

Offline cyclops

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
Re: Open Source Vs. Patenting
« Reply #61 on: January 25, 2008, 12:39:00 AM »
Thanks Omni, I believe I will post a video of my device soon, as it seems to me that it would be the right thing to do.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline mapsrg

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 173
Re: Open Source Vs. Patenting
« Reply #62 on: January 25, 2008, 05:57:50 AM »
The first patents were issued in Venice and usthered in an era of massive growth as opposed to the dark ages.....IF the UN was worth anything there should of been an international agreement on patents by now...but no.Still technological advancement  like free energy cannot be limited once it is revealed....it would become the standard because of economic impact and its impact would free the world from its shackles in so many different ways.

Offline ashtweth_nihilisti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 727
    • Panacea-BOCAF
Re: Open Source Vs. Patenting
« Reply #63 on: August 22, 2008, 03:48:17 AM »
It wont happen, and its no where NOW.

The argument is over my friends,  ALL would be patent holders are worried about the open source money loss side of it. Well empirical cases prove that thats NOT the case. Open source can get renumeration, and its the only way to get safety and ENSURE (read that again) dissemination. I don't want to hear that others are different with patenting as they have no technology out there,  where is it? be out next week?.Sorry. Its no where. Steron is no where, Steven Ryan is no where, EBM is no where(these are modern cases with technology already ready to market and patented) Why are you the patent holders different? you will do some thing different then they did? LOL Sorry you can do nothing they didn't do.

The argument is over about not being able to make money from open source.Ossie Freedom did that with a  booster (http://www.overunity.com/hho.htm) he open sourced it and now makes 3-4 million per year in book sales.If i need to explain WHY a patent limits the inventor then i am afraid the patent holder is not of sound mental mind.

For what ever reason the patent holder with free energy technology may feel

Open source can get you money
Open source IS THE ONLY SECURITY (given the nature of free energy technology politically)
Open source gets out in REAL TIME

So whats the excuse? there is none.

Ash
« Last Edit: October 06, 2008, 04:01:11 AM by hartiberlin »


Offline utilitarian

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 816
Re: Open Source Vs. Patenting
« Reply #64 on: August 22, 2008, 06:54:25 AM »
It wont happen, and its no where NOW.

The argument is over my friends,  ALL would be patent holders are worried about the open source money loss side of it. Well empirical cases prove that thats NOT the case. Open source can get renumeration, and its the only way to get safety and ENSURE (read that again) dissemination. I don't want to hear that others are different with patenting as they have no technology out there,  where is it? be out next week?.Sorry. Its no where. Steron is no where, Steven Ryan is no where, EBM is no where(these are modern cases with technology already ready to market and patented) Why are you the patent holders different? you will do some thing different then they did? LOL Sorry you can do nothing they didn't do.

The argument is over about not being able to make money from open source.Ossie Freedom did that with a very crappy booster (water4gas) he open sourced it and now makes 3-4 million per year in book sales.If i need to explain WHY a patent limits the inventor then i am afraid the patent holder is not of sound mental mind.

For what ever reason the patent holder with free energy technology may feel

Open source can get you money
Open source IS THE ONLY SECURITY (given the nature of free energy technology politically)
Open source gets out in REAL TIME

So whats the excuse? there is none.

Ash

I am confused.  You are citing examples of Steorn and EBM, which have produced nothing because they have nothing.  It is not a patent issue, it is an inablitiy-to-produce issue.

Interestingly, there is an equal amount of open-source working free energy devices - zero.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Open Source Vs. Patenting
« Reply #64 on: August 22, 2008, 06:54:25 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Xformer

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
Re: Open Source Vs. Patenting
« Reply #65 on: August 22, 2008, 07:35:36 AM »
I am confused.  You are citing examples of Steorn and EBM, which have produced nothing because they have nothing.  It is not a patent issue, it is an inablitiy-to-produce issue.

Interestingly, there is an equal amount of open-source working free energy devices - zero.


@utilitarian
Would U please give us some more solid examples of working FE devices  getting to --- zero?
Are those technical issues or personal issues?

I assume open source always give immediate positive educational effects for general public on tech ideas and info.
Would that be considered overall as a better human achievement !?

Offline professor

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 281
Re: Open Source Vs. Patenting
« Reply #66 on: August 22, 2008, 07:36:44 AM »
Right on!
Unfortunately I have to agree with you.
But what is the recourse?
Having as many devices as you can afford build in China or in countries not dictated to by you know who?
then have them flood the Market.
Only problem is you will not be able to import these devices.
Get rid of the  "You know who" is the only solution that I can see,besides keeping your invention to yourself .
Professor




quote author=d3adp00l link=topic=1821.msg32727#msg32727 date=1180326419]
One problem my friend, if I see what you design, and I have money, then I get my lawyers to patent it, that I sue you into the stone age(and everyone you sold plans to). Then I change it a bit so it doesn't quite work show that product, no one has faith in it and it disappears. 7 years of slander and mystique put it out of the main stream, and that is about it. If you the original inventor decide to build it after the 7 years, I just threaten you and your family, heck I might even do something more than scare you. Or just buy you off, cough(Steven mark(s)). Its a game of chess and one doesn't win chess by making one winning move its a series of moves that leads up to that one move and keeping your opponent from seeing your end goal.
[/quote]

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Open Source Vs. Patenting
« Reply #66 on: August 22, 2008, 07:36:44 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline jeffc

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 96
Re: Open Source Vs. Patenting
« Reply #67 on: August 22, 2008, 07:59:06 AM »
Problem is when you have a f.e machine and you do not patent it. Sombody will come around and claim the idea as theirs and do patent it and stop all progress on the thing. You can't do a thing because they have the patent, and are sitting on it.

What you can do is:
Invent a f.e device. Patent it. BUT be fully transparant in the patent. Discribe everything. So people can fully and without hidden stuff replicate it completely. In that way a patent can become a worldwide available and free instuction manual for all.

Nali2001,

I don't agree with your assumption about patents.  Patents cannot be granted for things already invented.  Now, that doesn't mean the patent office knows everything that has been invented, but they do check many sources, including anything published by groups such as IEEE.  So if you invent a FE machine, you need to open source it and publish it everywhere you can, especially at official places like IEEE which will prove the date you published. 

Of course, you could also decide to patent your invention too, and many people here don't seem to realize that a patent doesn't prevent you from giving the invention to the public.  As a patent holder you can do whatever you want with the invention, including giving it to the public.

Regards,
jeffc

Offline jeffc

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 96
Re: Open Source Vs. Patenting
« Reply #68 on: August 22, 2008, 08:01:33 AM »
Right on!
Unfortunately I have to agree with you.
But what is the recourse?
Having as many devices as you can afford build in China or in countries not dictated to by you know who?
then have them flood the Market.
Only problem is you will not be able to import these devices.
Get rid of the  "You know who" is the only solution that I can see,besides keeping your invention to yourself .
Professor




quote author=d3adp00l link=topic=1821.msg32727#msg32727 date=1180326419]
One problem my friend, if I see what you design, and I have money, then I get my lawyers to patent it, that I sue you into the stone age(and everyone you sold plans to). Then I change it a bit so it doesn't quite work show that product, no one has faith in it and it disappears. 7 years of slander and mystique put it out of the main stream, and that is about it. If you the original inventor decide to build it after the 7 years, I just threaten you and your family, heck I might even do something more than scare you. Or just buy you off, cough(Steven mark(s)). Its a game of chess and one doesn't win chess by making one winning move its a series of moves that leads up to that one move and keeping your opponent from seeing your end goal.


Patents take a while to be granted, typically 18 months to several years.  That should be plenty of time for a working invention to be spread around the world open source.

Regards,
jeffc

Offline ashtweth_nihilisti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 727
    • Panacea-BOCAF
Re: Open Source Vs. Patenting
« Reply #69 on: August 22, 2008, 09:26:48 AM »
>I am confused.  You are citing examples of Steorn and EBM, which have produced nothing because they have nothing.  It is not a patent issue, it is an inablitiy-to-produce issue

Your confused as you don't know all the facts ;)

1) i have personally spoken to EBM, and they offered for us to come up and learn their technology (they have a physical device there)
http://panacea-bocaf.org/energybymotion.htm

They also now charge an enormous amount of money to partner with them.
Steorn another story but same pattern with the patent.

Its only down the track they had to the independent validation, but still could they have not of done what ossie freedom did and got it out there in REAL time?
The FACTS are simple.

Patent, stagnation
open source=progress and renumeration is possible





Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Open Source Vs. Patenting
« Reply #69 on: August 22, 2008, 09:26:48 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline starcruiser

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 695
    • Starcruiser's Place
Re: Open Source Vs. Patenting
« Reply #70 on: August 22, 2008, 03:51:26 PM »
The only real thing the patent office does is give the government the ability to steal the invention from you. The first thing the patent office does is allow the government to review the data to determine if it is worthy of use by the government or if it is a national security risk (a risk to the financial stability/market as they see it). IF any of this holds true they confiscate it and tell the person/group who attempted to patent it that it already was patented and the government holds the patent and threatens them with jail and/or court action if they continue pursuing the tech.

The other side of the coin is if the idea is worthy and not a threat to the establishment, it will be leaked to a friendly company while the patent office holds up your application so the other company can file and get approval first, thus locking the little guy out of the opportunity.

I say open source is the only way to go, this at least prevents the suppression mechanism of the government and Big Business stealing the idea. I agree with the idea of sharing it with a lot of others and produce copies and release them at the same time, this would at least give them (the elites) a headache and give the inventor a chance at get the tech out there for the masses to benefit from and potentially make a few bucks in the process.

Offline ashtweth_nihilisti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 727
    • Panacea-BOCAF
Re: Open Source Vs. Patenting
« Reply #71 on: August 22, 2008, 04:40:33 PM »
here here

people don't understand that your not patenting a device, your threating the status quo
there is no such thing as a patent on a free energy device, ask Newman.

Until we have a centralized hub where in the public eye we can validate,  disclose and protect inventions like can be the case in the example of the proposed granted Panacea research and development center
http://panacea-bocaf.org/researchanddevelopment.htm
inventors are better off seeking remuneration or money through open source books sales like Ossie freedom.

Ash


Offline utilitarian

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 816
Re: Open Source Vs. Patenting
« Reply #72 on: August 23, 2008, 04:40:27 PM »
@utilitarian
Would U please give us some more solid examples of working FE devices  getting to --- zero?
Are those technical issues or personal issues?

I assume open source always give immediate positive educational effects for general public on tech ideas and info.
Would that be considered overall as a better human achievement !?

You want an example of there being no working free energy devices?  How can there be an example of that?  There can only be an example of a working free energy device, of which there is none.  If you have an example of anything that has been verified, it would be earth-shattering news, so out with it, my good man!

I have no issue with open source.  Software, in particular, has benefitted much from the open source movement.  Though it should be noted that software development in particular lends itself to open source more than any other area I can think of, because it can be shared so easily, and work is easy to divide up.

And Ashtweth, I cannot believe you are dragging up EBM, one of the most notorious huckster companies in Hungary, and based on what?  Because you called them on the phone and they assured you they have a device?  Laughable.  Oh wait, and they want a lot of money?  Funny how that goes.  Do you know of a single company that uses an EBM to power anything?  Thought so.

Offline ashtweth_nihilisti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 727
    • Panacea-BOCAF
Re: Open Source Vs. Patenting
« Reply #73 on: August 23, 2008, 04:46:00 PM »
Hang on i remember you, i remember you usually make allot of incredulous assumptions and have no real contribution's, i remember you now
They have a physical device, go and see it and read the reports. its more then you have

Way more then you have.
i have no need or desire to discuss particulars with you, as now i remember you, my time is far more precious

You like that one?
I do

Regards
Ash

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline utilitarian

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 816
Re: Open Source Vs. Patenting
« Reply #74 on: August 23, 2008, 07:56:45 PM »
Hang on i remember you, i remember you usually make allot of incredulous assumptions and have no real contribution's, i remember you now
They have a physical device, go and see it and read the reports. its more then you have

Way more then you have.
i have no need or desire to discuss particulars with you, as now i remember you, my time is far more precious

You like that one?
I do

Regards
Ash

My contributions have resulted in exactly as many free energy breakthroughs as your contributions - exactly zero.

If you believe the EBM is real based on some reports, you are gullible beyond comprehension.  Name one company that has bought and uses an EBM device to power anything.  Surely there is one - they have been selling these things for years, right?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Open Source Vs. Patenting
« Reply #74 on: August 23, 2008, 07:56:45 PM »

 

Share this topic to your favourite Social and Bookmark site

Please SHARE this topic at: