John Newman <[email protected]> wrote: Also re item (2), a friend of mine said, over 50 years ago now, that you > can’t patent a law of nature, otherwise you’d have to pay royalties to the > estate of Sir Isaac Newton every time an apple fell on your head. >
Sir Isaac's patent would have expired by now. Anyway, you are right. That is what item 2 means. A "force of nature" is how it is sometimes referred to. David French explained: "Turning now to issues of patenting as they relate to Cold Fusion, a first misconception needs to be clarified. Patents must address products, processes or new compositions of matter. No patent is going to issue for the person who finally provides the correct theory that explains the source of the Cold Fusion effect. That is properly the subject for a Nobel Prize. Patents relate to products, articles, machines, or chemicals that are to be delivered to consumers or can be used by producers. . . ." - Jed
