On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 1:21 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson <[email protected]> wrote:
> If I had a highly controversial "free energy" device that I wanted to > market which didn't yet have adequate patent protection I would not in > be too much of a hurry to draw undue attention to the legitimacy of > who I am, or what I potentially represent, or of my invention. In > order to keep my "anonymity" an occasional piece of disinformation > strategically placed out on the Internet here and there would probably > go a long way in keeping most of those potential competitors > reasonably satisfied that I was nothing more than a scam artist. Not > to bother. > > In the meantime, I'd focus on two objectives: > > 1. Double my efforts to secure adequate patent protection. As many people in many places have noted, patent protection is effective from the first day of application and disclosure. The patent issue is totally a red herring. This was said by both a patent attorney and a patent examiner at one time or another during the saga. And if Rossi wanted to keep a low profile he would market privately like the Bloom Box which sold multiple working units to Google, eBay and some other giant before they made even a preliminary announcement. Read the Wikipedia on this product. The company would not even have done that except that the customers wanted the publicity.
