http://pesn.com/2012/08/18/9602162_My_Visit_to_Inteligentry/
My Visit to Inteligentry Even the usually supportive Sterling D. Allan of Pure Energy Systems News is asking hard questions. The entire area is in a herding cat’s type of predicament. The Rohner business plan is something that an engineer would come up with. If the Papp engine does work, the business plan might not. Cheers: Axil On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 9:41 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com>wrote: > At 12:15 PM 8/18/2012, James Bowery wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <<mailto: >> a...@lomaxdesign.com>a**b...@lomaxdesign.com <a...@lomaxdesign.com>> wrote: >> Note that this could be parallel with Jospeh Papp. Papp apparently >> planted red herrings in his patent applications, things that he knew would >> not work, to throw people trying to imitate his engine off. Too bad that >> this is the opposite of the intention of a patent.... >> >> >> More importantly, as I have already stated in this forum, it vitiates the >> patent in all countries. Moreover in all countries but the US, which is >> "first to invent" rather than "first to file", it opens the door to a valid >> patent filing in the present by those who decipher the prior patent. In >> other words, the noble gas engine has never been in the public domain >> because its patent disclosure did not, in fact, disclose in such a way that >> those "skilled in the art" (what art?) could reproduce the benefit of the >> invention. >> > > Whether or not this is so depends on the exact language of the patent. > Probably so. But I'd check with a lawyer before depending on new > patentability. > > John Rohner, or one of his companies, which he might or might not still > control -- this whole thing is too complicated for the average bear -- > obtained a new patent fairly recently, which might or might not cover > current work. I haven't read it. Not planning to. > > Beware of investing in the Papp Engine at this point. The whole situation > is a tangled mess. If interested, building a popper would be in order. If > Bob Rohner has any sense, he'll encourage people to buy a popper from him, > since he's actually demonstrated it. He could easily provide plans for it, > with a license to build one, for cheap, and at a decent profit. John's > going to eat his lunch if he doesn't. > > Unless John doesn't really have a popper and is just bluffing.... > > See what I mean about mess? Don't risk your life savings just because > someone talks a good line. Even if they have a running engine, it could > turn out that they don't own the technology, they will lose their shirts, > and you along with them. > > Be careful! > > >
