From: "Colonel Bosco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Your water example is UNALLOCATED AND UNSEGREGATED water ----- you have > claim to water COMINGLED WITH WATER OWNED BY OTHERS.
The GoldMoney example is UNALLOCATED AND UNSEGREGATED gold ----- you have claim to gold COMINGLED WITH GOLD OWNED BY OTHERS. If you have a valid claim to the gold, then you own the gold. That's what a claim is. A claim to own something. > This water rights example doesn't apply.. It doesn't apply to the issue of > the Patent and Patent infringement. > > However it is a another pretty good example of how GMN doesn't comply with > the Patent --- as your GGrams are NOT ALLOCATED AND SEGREGATED AND TITLED to > the owner of the GG's (as specified in the Patent). The GoldMoney system does indeed conform to Patent Number 5,671,364 (23-Sep-1997). This patent applies to GoldMoney as it is currently implemented. The GoldMoney system does NOT conform to Patent Number 5,983,207 (09-Nov-1999). This is the patent that deals with "ecoins" with individual "digital hallmarks." Should GoldMoney decide to construct such a system, it would be covered under this patent. By the way, in case you think I'm a rabid "pro-patent" guy, I'm definitely not. Back on the old patent thread from last year, I was questioning the whole idea of patents, on the premise that intellectual property could be handled better without such government measures. At that time, I even questioned the wisdom of GoldMoney running to the government with this patent dispute. I thought it might invite too much government regulation. -- Patrick --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
