|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, December 01 2012 @ 02:43 PM EST |
One of the key points that most people seem to forget is that there is nothing
to stop a company or an individual from taking the points mentioned in an
existing patent and IMPROVING upon the ideas described in other patents. If your
idea does what is described in a patent but does it in a way that is outside the
scope of the original patent then there is nothing to stop your application from
being granted.
This is why patent layers do the hard graft (or should do) of looking for prior
art. You have to make your application just different enough from existing
patents and you are home free.
So Tesla demo'd this a century or more ago. So what. That could be totally
irrelevant to the current application. The devil is in the detail.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: kjs on Saturday, December 01 2012 @ 08:35 PM EST |
quote: I do wonder how those who think that nearby power lines and mobile phones
can cause cancer would react to these devices.
The same way they react to power lines and mobile base stations. They loudly (up
to violently) complain and while doing so you can see them with a cellphone at
their ear. That's a lot more field strength than the 1/2mi away base station or
the 1mi away power line....
Must have something to do with either brain capacity or the optical disadvantage
of the objects.
>kjs
---
not f'd, you won't find me on farcebook[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, December 01 2012 @ 09:00 PM EST |
Do adding the words computer, network, keyboard and mouse make a difference to
the patent-ability?
Sure there is tuning of the wireless power signal and communication, but is this
new? I don't think so.
To my untrained eye it is no more patentable than running the listed devices on
dry cells.
Anyway good luck with interference, safety and security.
Oh dear the magic smoke escaped, DoS by coil?
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Ian Al on Sunday, December 02 2012 @ 02:20 AM EST |
.
---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid![ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
