James, your comment might be right, but I suggest we have a bigger
problem. Since patent protection for the basic process is not
possible, a patent for the best application is the only protection.
This is similar to the situation in mature technologies. However, a
great deal of money will be needed to apply CF in the best way, with
no assurance that someone else might find a better way before any
return on the investment can be realized. Consequently, no incentive
is created for seed money from private sources to get involved. This
means the seed money has to come from government, which has no
interest in getting involved because of the threat to present energy
sources. This leaves Rossi as the last man standing, i.e. until a big
industry discovers the secret recipe, perhaps in China, and solves the
engineering problems faster than Rossi can. After this happens, small
companies will be able to get money to improve and patent the
application to special markets, as is the case for the present mature
technologies. Meanwhile, the rest of us are treated to a show of
nonsense and irrationally.
Ed
On Aug 13, 2013, at 8:54 AM, James Bowery wrote:
Perhaps it is the winning path for this technology but for his
investors?
I have a bit of experience with international patent law, having
paid for a rocket engine patent's international filing. In my
situation, there was no option but to obtain a patent in every
jurisdiction in the world because it takes only one unprotected
jurisdiction anywhere in the world to absorb _all_ of the profit
stream from that technology: Set up a launch and manufacturing
facility in the unprotected jurisdiction and have everyone send
their payloads to that jurisdiction.
However, with something like LENR the game is entirely different.
All it takes is one protected jurisdiction anywhere in the world to
realize enormous profits.
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Edmund Storms
<stor...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
Good comment, Jones. I totally agree with you. Unfortunately, the
well was poisoned from the start by the US patent office refusal to
accept ANY patent for many years and the DOE panel by its one sided
conclusion, both of which created a legal situation that doomed any
serious study of CF. Now the expected and natural consequences are
being experienced. Rossi may eventually be the last man standing
because he found the secret recipe and used his own money to start
the process. His approach, while looking crazy by conventional
standards, might be the winning path for this technology.
Ed
On Aug 13, 2013, at 8:11 AM, Jones Beene wrote:
You are correct AF. There is little way for any outside investor to
benefit
from a DGT stock offering - no matter what they have... and I think
that
they do have a valid thermal anomaly in the early stages of
development.
It will be a laugh to see how many billions of shares they have
available.
Here is a document on Canadian legal requirements which indicates
that they
must have actually filed a prospectus even before as they were
moving to
Vancouver - and included a lot of facts which they probably would
rather
keep silent about:
books.google.com/books?isbn=1553672070
Where is their prospectus? It should be enlightening to read it - in
the
context of what we know to be historically true.
We tend to forget that it is entirely possible to build a deliberate
scam on
top of valid energy anomaly (especially an anomaly discovered and
patented
by someone else).
Even if everything which DGT showed the world on the Internet in
Italy was
basically accurate as to the thermal anomaly, a stock offering in
November
is premature and doomed by circumstances. This can only be a net
negative
for the rest of the field. It is called "poisoning the well".
DGT are a minimum of three years from a commercial product and much
longer
from mass production. They have no valid patent. Their process seems
to
infringe on half a dozen patent applications, which have preceded
them. No
VC will touch them. The lifetime of the unit is unknown, even if the
energy
is strongly anomalous for a few days. The list goes on-and-on.
If they had anything valid at all, and let me repeat - I believe
that they
do have something valid but it was invented elsewhere - then they
should
proceed to try to understand the phenomenon better through a
University or
Government, and that happens only by abandoning a brain-dead
business plan,
which is most of the problem.
It is the kind of business plan that a scammer would device - not a
scientist.
