Re: [Vo]:Re: Anyone can "steal" IP from a patent

Hi Bob, As I reread the relevant section of the license agreement, I am startled by how broad the language is. It covers the existing IP as well as any derivative works and future inventions. It is one of those paragraphs in a contract where, if I were the signing party, I would wonder how a

[Vo]:

extropy...@gmail.com

[Vo]:Re: Anyone can "steal" IP from a patent

Lennart and Eric-- I see where Eric is coming from regarding the Hot Cat being part of the E-Cat IP for which Rossi licenses use by the Company (IH). However, the only place it is apparently covered by a document (appendix to the agreement) is as a patent application. The validation test in

RE: [Vo]:Details of the Thermacore runaway in 1996

Now that you mention it, and realizing how enticing/dangerous it would be to a certain segment of the population, the hope is that no one gets hurt trying it. We have seen crazy stunts with thermite and other energetic materials on YouTube. In a worst case, we are talking about something which

RE: [Vo]:Re: Anyone can "steal" IP from a patent

From: Daniel Rocha I think it covered the hot cats. The cold cat is way too weird. Generally cold fusion happens with high temperatures, at least microscopically. For example, the working function of a metal is 4eV. So, when you do electrolysis, you have at at least at tiny places the

Re: [Vo]:Re: Anyone can "steal" IP from a patent

Lennart, I said that with more confidence than is warranted. I am not a lawyer, so I do not know how to interpret a license agreement, how the court will interpret this particular agreement, or what IH and Rossi should have put in it with the benefit of hindsight. But I suggest to anyone who is

Re: [Vo]:Re: Anyone can "steal" IP from a patent

Eric , I agree with your evaluation of the contract. However, there is one of the issues I do not understand about IH's handling. Why did they not specify the details of how the transfer should be done. I would in their shoes. Maybe I just have been around for too long:) IMHO that is a major flaw

Re: [Vo]:Details of the Thermacore runaway in 1996

Jones, Very interesting account. I have occasionally had the fantasy of modifying a pressure cooker, adding 10 pounds of nickel powder, and adding hydrogen (after degassing). On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 1:09 PM Jones Beene wrote: > Most observers of the LENR/nickel hydride

Re: [Vo]:Re: Anyone can "steal" IP from a patent

I think it covered the hot cats. The cold cat is way too weird. Generally cold fusion happens with high temperatures, at least microscopically. For example, the working function of a metal is 4eV. So, when you do electrolysis, you have at at least at tiny places the equivalent of 40,000 K. Though,

Re: [Vo]:Re: Anyone can "steal" IP from a patent

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Bob Cook wrote: The Hot Cat is a different invention and its operation was not covered in > the IP transferred by the IP of the agreement IMHO. > I read the license agreement quite differently. It had language pertaining to all future

Re: [Vo]:Details of the Thermacore runaway in 1996

Wow so this triggered at room temperature? I wish we new more about this test and its products, especially with the hindsight of all that's been learnt in the 20 years since. It's an interesting topic much needed now. I miss reading these scientific discussions on vortex-l. Has any one tried

Re: [Vo]:Re: Anyone can "steal" IP from a patent

The only way to steal IP from a patent (other than producing and selling in secret) is to make changes, possibly ones that give you a superior technology that is not protected by their patent that you then patent. ' Patents are about giving IP freely, but protecting the rights. Thinking about it,

Re: [Vo]:Details of the Thermacore runaway in 1996

Jones Beene wrote: > You are not alone – few know of this incident. But it’s not a sensible > choice to base anything regarding the validity of LENR on Rossi’s > problems with IH. > Yes, there is hardly any connection. To put it (the runaway) into context, there had already

Re: [Vo]:Details of the Thermacore runaway in 1996

Details of the Thermacore runaway in 1996Jones etal-- Also most observers of the LENR scene are unaware of the details of a British 1956 patent describing what may be a LENR. Hank Mills has written a good summary of the invention on E Cat World I believe. It got by me as a reactor designer

RE: [Vo]:Details of the Thermacore runaway in 1996

Dave, You are not alone – few know of this incident. But it’s not a sensible choice to base anything regarding the validity of LENR on Rossi’s problems with IH. The technology will survive, but Rossi’s lack of credibility could taint the field and impede progress for years. The Thermacore

Re: [Vo]:Details of the Thermacore runaway in 1996

David Roberson wrote: I have not heard of that particular thermal run away reaction that you have > listed below but would find it interesting to follow up on. > I heard about it from Gene Mallove, but no details were forthcoming. It is tragic that they did not follow up on

Re: [Vo]:Details of the Thermacore runaway in 1996

Jones, Is it possible to find another source to back up what you are describing in this event? A second written record would be fine if available. I have not heard of that particular thermal run away reaction that you have listed below but would find it interesting to follow up on. The

[Vo]:Details of the Thermacore runaway in 1996

Most observers of the LENR/nickel hydride scene are unaware of the details of the Thermacore, Inc. runaway reaction back in 1996. Unfortunately, this was the last effort that this company made in the field, and the main reason that they dropped LENR. The incident echoes other thermal runaways,

Re: [Vo]: I.H. is good at calorimetry but bad at doing business

Lennart Thornros wrote: > I meant there is no technology in the dispute just now. > The dispute is about Rossi's reactor, which is technology. Perhaps I fail to understand what you mean. IMHO you have no right to call Rossi a scammer. > I do. Rossi showed that he is a

Re: [Vo]: I.H. is good at calorimetry but bad at doing business

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 8:55 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > I never said it is the ultimate answer, or the only thing needed. I said > that government has made many essential contributions, such as railroads, > steam ships, highways, the computer, nuclear power, weather

Re: [Vo]: I.H. is good at calorimetry but bad at doing business

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 9:57 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > That's absurd. Why would they not pay if the technology works? > At, say, 10% how much would you think the royalties in China would be worth? Hypothetically?

Re: [Vo]:Re: Anyone can "steal" IP from a patent

Bob Cook wrote: It would seem the only PHOSITA that was required by the agreement was for > the low temperature E-Cat. Rossi has indicated he taught the IH engineers > what was necessary to operate the E-Cat, probably up to a COP of 6. That > is all the patent

[Vo]:what kind of theory needs LENR?

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/05/may-19-2016-lenr-needs-productive.html do not ignore the Info, please, I collected it with some effort The LENR muses are silent these days peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

[Vo]:Re: Anyone can "steal" IP from a patent

Peter, Jed and others-- It would seem the only PHOSITA that was required by the agreement was for the low temperature E-Cat. Rossi has indicated he taught the IH engineers what was necessary to operate the E-Cat, probably up to a COP of 6. That is all the patent identified. The Hot Cat

Re: [Vo]: I.H. is good at calorimetry but bad at doing business

Lennart Thornros wrote: > You believe that government is the ultimate answer to progress - that is > far from business as the moon from the sun . . . > I never said it is the ultimate answer, or the only thing needed. I said that government has made many essential

Re: [Vo]: I.H. is good at calorimetry but bad at doing business

Yes, Eric. I think he is a man on a mission. I do not say your two conclusions are wrong. I think there are many more conclusions and to select is hard or impossible. Yes, if we limit the field to engineering than they are fewer. Both yours are possibly thoughts created by an entrepreneur and all

Re: [Vo]: I.H. is good at calorimetry but bad at doing business

Jed, You believe that government is the ultimate answer to progress - that is far from business as the moon from the sun (Yes, they appear similar in size and color). I just do not think that is of any value to know that one of us are more business experienced than the other. All I am saying the

Re: [Vo]: I.H. is good at calorimetry but bad at doing business

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Lennart Thornros wrote: As it comes to if Rossi's claims are real or not. I do not know but much of > his behavior tells me he is a real guy and as most inventors / > entrepreneurs hard to deal with. They are by nature hardnosed and outside

Re: [Vo]: I.H. is good at calorimetry but bad at doing business

Lennart Thornros wrote: > > Your statements indicate that you have little understanding about business. > You are mistaken. I have good understanding of business, and experience in it. > As it comes to if Rossi's claims are real or not. I do not know but much > of his

Re: [Vo]: I.H. is good at calorimetry but bad at doing business

Jed, I am not going over all your statements. Your statements indicate that you have little understanding about business. It is seldom black and white. Yes, there is a standard of conduct between competitors in any industry, so in the community of investment companies. Your hang up on technical

Re: [Vo]: I.H. is good at calorimetry but bad at doing business

from here on, the discussion goes on a slope i dislike...probbaly it is about the Price.. too highand despite everything they say now, they are contented with what they already have plus an army of LENR specialistsable to do great deeds...outRossi Rossi... They already have a Rossi technology

Re: [Vo]: I.H. is good at calorimetry but bad at doing business

Peter Gluck wrote: too much psychology...IH admits paying 11 million was a mistake > specifically for NOT paying the due 89 millions. A simple gambit. > That's absurd. Why would they not pay if the technology works? They will be plagued with lawsuits. If they try to

Re: [Vo]: I.H. is good at calorimetry but bad at doing business

too much psychology...IH admits paying 11 million was a mistake specifically for NOT paying the due 89 millions. A simple gambit. peter On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 4:34 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Lennart Thornros wrote: > >> Yes, Alberto. >> That is why

Re: [Vo]: I.H. is good at calorimetry but bad at doing business

Lennart Thornros wrote: > Yes, Alberto. > That is why Jed's claims are so hard to buy. > These are not my claims. I am quoting press releases issued by I.H. You should say "I.H.'s claims are hard to buy." They are saying they made an $11 million mistake. Perhaps you find

Re: [Vo]: I.H. is good at calorimetry but bad at doing business

Yes, Alberto. That is why Jed's claims are so hard to buy. IH should have business acumen as most investment companion I have met with. On May 18, 2016 17:30, "Alberto De Souza" wrote: Based on what Jed said so far, I.H. is very good at calorimetry but very bad at

Re: [Vo]:Anyone can "steal" IP from a patent

Dear Jed,, PHOSIA is a slogan-acronym with one poisoned letter "O" ordinary skill has to be defined for each case. The difference between patent and know how is greater for processes than for products. I give you an example: - a patent gives a recipe with ingredients in some limits, sometimes