As I recall, a patent may be denied ( and possibly implementation forbidden ) if it would be substantially disruptive to the US economy ( that seems to imply that the really great inventions are suppressed :-( ).
A good strategy then may be to get your stuff on the market before the gov't realizes what just happened. http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:35_U.S.C._181:Secrecy_of_certain_inve ntions_and_withholding_of_patent Hoyt Stearns Scottsdale, Arizona US -----Original Messag [Hoyt A. Stearns Jr.] e----- From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 4:36 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Test day in Greece time noone noone <thesteornpa...@yahoo.com> wrote: We do not need both companies if one company has stolen intellectual property. We do NOT know if this is the case. I am not saying they have stolen intellectual property. But if they have, they need to be stopped from selling any products that use Rossi's IP (or use IP they developed by studying Rossi's IP without permission.) That never happens, at least not in the U.S. That is not how civil lawsuits and patent laws are enforced. Everyone continues selling until the court decides. If there is an infringement the judge awards the winner with a large share of the profits from the loser. No one "stops X from selling" except when X is a minor player and putting X out of business would have no impact on consumers.[Hoyt A. Stearns Jr.] ... - Jed
