Its a sealed and dated reference of notes that will be used at a later date when filing a patent that the inventor can refer back to.  This ensures he has documented notes for a disclosure so he can refer back to this if someone should file claims that are similiar to his before the patent application is filed.  It is not a patent or a patent application.

Anyone please feel free to correct me if my understanding is incorrect, but sealed notes are pretty worthless for patent purposes.

Prior to just a few years back, the US was indeed using the "first to invent" method of choosing which of multiple applicants to award a patent to.  Under this method, if two inventors filed a patent on the same invention, an interference hearing could be used to determine who actually invented the device first, and that "first person" was awarded the patent.  It is for the purpose of such a hearing that an inventor's notes, previous prototypes, NDA's, etc, could be used to prove the earliest date the invention was conceived by the inventor (and to prove that the inventor diligently worked on that invention throughout that prior period).

However, in 2011 the US switched to "first to file", which is similar to the EU and Canada.  In this system, whoever gets to the patent office first wins.  Even if an inventor has proof that his invention was conceived many years prior, and that the inventor had been working diligently all that time to develop the invention, another inventor that might only have worked on the invention for a month prior to filing would still be awarded the patent if he gets it to the patent office first.

This "first to file" is a terrible system.  If an inventor works on something for years and its methods/operation somehow leaks out to another party, that party can rush off to be the "first to file", even though he was not the true inventor.

In short, anyone who believes notarized notes, videos, mail backs, etc, are of any value to the current patent process are mistaken.  Any company/attorney that tells you that somehow publishing a notice of intention to file or allowing them to retain a copy of your notes for you will somehow help with winning a patent, are likely scamming you for money.  Prior to 2011, such things may have had utility during an interference hearing, but are likely of little use at this time.

All my patent work was done prior to 2011, so possibly I misunderstand the new "first to file" system the US has adopted, but the above is how I understand it to now be. 

Again, please feel free to correct me if I am mistaken.

PW

Stephan could give people or say a group to have private threads where only the ones in the group can read or post in that thread. And when the group hopefully comes to a conclusion, that it becomes an open thread for everyone to read. Like a fresh book at the news stand. Or even not so private, and only the group can post there. This would enable a solid ground for only positive posts on the subject without pages of interference. And if anyone else wants to post a public rebuttal thread, then they that want to criticize can do so there, while leaving the group thread intact with all positive aspects of the thread subject, so readers that want the raw info as it pours in can get through it a lot quicker. And if a reader wants to go to the critics thread, they can read that also. 

Im sure there are many out there that would agree, the negativity aspect, insults and the like gets tiresome. Also makes for a lot of time wasted for the reader that doesnt have much interest in the bickering and get down to business. Time is money they say.

Lets say there are certain criteria for having a group only thread. Possibly the group has to volunteer to actually do tests and experiments as a commitment to being able to have a clean thread.   Everything has a price these days.

Also, probably the biggest advantage would be to the device claimant. A place they can go with a chosen few and discuss and post without trashing along the way. If someone really has something and wants to share, it should not be an uncomfortable event in their lives.     There are many here that if they were in the group, would treat the claimant as a human being whether the claim was proven right or wrong. And some that belittle to the very end without ever even a light bulb and battery on the table.

Any way, if anyone likes the idea of group threads, ask Stefan if it is possible.

Mags

Mags:

There are several problems with that.  First, it is censorship, which is an ugly word and probably has no place on an "OPEN SOURCE" website. 
Second, this idea would allow folks like the QEG group to continue to post bogus claims (while continuing to raise money by fraud) without allowing anyone with a differing (and correct) opinion to post.

I think the issue here is really nothing more than good moderation.  Not biased moderation, nor clickish moderation, but true and well done moderation.

So, if someone posts a "proven overunity device" as a topic, and someone else asks who has proven it and where are the test results, it is not considered trolling to ask a legit question.  In your suggested approach, (if I understand it correctly) no one who might ask such a question would ever be allowed into that group so, folks could be deceived for a long, long time.  What is that harm with that?  Well, decent folks working hard for their money would find themselves ordering parts and components to attempt to replicate a fake device that never had a chance of ever working.  We have seen that many times here...too many times.

Now, to your point. (as I see it)  If I make a topic that says I have discovered something interesting and want folks to look at it, and the next post says..."Your Mother was a ", I think we can all agree that this is not constructive and should be dealt with by a good Moderator.

If someone asks..."Why do you think it is interesting and where are your measurements?"  I should not claim that they are from the MIB and blocking my attempt to share valuable info.

Folks should be able to ask questions of a claimant...any one should be able to do so.  If the claimant thinks he/she is being attacked because they have been asked legit questions...then...too bad.  If they are indeed being bashed for no reason...then a good Moderator should step in.

Open source should be open.

Anyway, my 2.975 cents on the matter.

Bill

Bill
 Perhaps the point needs clarity
here we tried to involve resident _Experts_ in a test procedure
not referring to  TinselKoala
all we got here was a "YOU GOTTA BE KIDDING ME " linch mob,
50 pages of "SAVE THE WORLD FROM THE THIEVING SCAM ARTIST""

 Non stop negative comments as well as all manner of assumptions and innuendos.
Most recent again by  Nink [ASSUMPTION AND INNUENDO]
I would have to say at a ten to one ratio.
I tried a few months back with Bill Alek's project
same thing.
How about just treating people the way you would like to be treated.
For Pete's sake we're talking about a man that invited Me to do a Test [same with Mr.Alek]

HOW is that like the QEG thing....
Since when is opensource a licence to behave like this?


actually turns my stomach.....


Chet

Bill
Quote
I do hope that you actually get to "test" this device.
---------------------
Bill
I think that is the jist of Mag's point.


having this type of response to an invitation is a prelude to getting shown the door......


not good, not good at all.


Thx
Chet

I fully agree with the statements regarding the first to file changes last year and that to secure the rights to a disclosure there is only one real option, and that is to file a disclosure with the patent office. The decision to not file a legitimate disclosure is confusing at best. There are significant advantages to keeping an inventors notebook and this will certainly assist in bolstering any claims. As I am not a patent attorney I can not advise on the opportunities to invalidate another inventors disclosure if you can demonstrate prior art and intent within a 12  month period of first disclosing your invention.   I can only suggest he should engage the appropiate people in support of his claim and file as soon as possible.

Mags:

There are several problems with that.  First, it is censorship, which is an ugly word and probably has no place on an "OPEN SOURCE" website. 
Second, this idea would allow folks like the QEG group to continue to post bogus claims (while continuing to raise money by fraud) without allowing anyone with a differing (and correct) opinion to post.

I think the issue here is really nothing more than good moderation.  Not biased moderation, nor clickish moderation, but true and well done moderation.

So, if someone posts a "proven overunity device" as a topic, and someone else asks who has proven it and where are the test results, it is not considered trolling to ask a legit question.  In your suggested approach, (if I understand it correctly) no one who might ask such a question would ever be allowed into that group so, folks could be deceived for a long, long time.  What is that harm with that?  Well, decent folks working hard for their money would find themselves ordering parts and components to attempt to replicate a fake device that never had a chance of ever working.  We have seen that many times here...too many times.

Now, to your point. (as I see it)  If I make a topic that says I have discovered something interesting and want folks to look at it, and the next post says..."Your Mother was a ", I think we can all agree that this is not constructive and should be dealt with by a good Moderator.

If someone asks..."Why do you think it is interesting and where are your measurements?"  I should not claim that they are from the MIB and blocking my attempt to share valuable info.

Folks should be able to ask questions of a claimant...any one should be able to do so.  If the claimant thinks he/she is being attacked because they have been asked legit questions...then...too bad.  If they are indeed being bashed for no reason...then a good Moderator should step in.

Open source should be open.

Anyway, my 2.975 cents on the matter.

Bill

Im not saying every thread be group threads. 

Lets say if some group wanted to write a book on a subject. The publisher does not inject many pages from skeptics of the ideas in the book. And why dont the publishers do that?? Censorship??

It has nothing to do with censorship by allowing a group to have a clean thread. The skeptics can make their own thread in order not to be censored, being its all on the same site. Moderation does not keep a thread clean. All the crap is still posted. Most of the time its temporary banning then back to the same littering by them or someone else. 

OUR has private groups. And its not about censorship or hiding things from being open source. Its about a comfortable place to be when people want to discuss a subject without page after page of harassment. There are also open threads on most of the subjects that are discussed in group threads.

Mags

Reality may be a cruel mistress, but the only thing she harasses is delusion.

Yeah. I suppose so.

Like in U.S. schools, instead of teaching how and why our for fathers helped guide this country into the great nation that it 'was', they teach more that they were slave drivers and that Alah is the only god down to the 3rd grade. But if you say "Jesus" or the like, the child gets suspended.    Yeah, reality at its best. So no sense in 'trying' to make things any better. If the screw machine aint broke, dont fix it?

A thread such as this one, yeah, open thread. Nobody has any idea on how to build or experiment the contraption. Shown a lot but not enough. Like Kapanadze, people try things, but there is not enough to go on to really do any testing at all. But when someone does prepare to show and put forth info for replication, then there should be no interference of negativity or pestering. If someone wants to build the device in retribution to the claim to prove it does not work, then that is all that is needed. Insults and name calling is just pure immaturity. Or is it something else?

When I see that kind of garbage toward others with ideas, I either think, 'This dude is a real jerk', or, 'Why are they coming down on this guy so hard.'  'Why do they push so hard to make the person look so bad?'  'Is it because they may really have something??'  Or is it something else.

Mags