Re: ATM 16" F/33 valid design?

["Peter John Smith" <pjifl@bigpond.com.au>]

Thanks to Michael Peck for unearthing that material I wrote previously.


Ric Rokosz commented :-


> Yes,he did patent it - the use of the really small
> secondary for long focus scopes, ....can you believe
> it. The US patent office is a joke...

Yes, it is hard to believe.

Unless he patented some mechanical peculiarity related to his implementation
I cannot see how it could ever stand up in court.

But, as someone pointed out to me many years ago, all a patent buys you is
the right to defend the idea in court.

And if the defender looses, then the whole world knows and it becomes void.

So who wins - the range of people in the Patent  Industry.

I am not totally cynical - patents on seminal ideas are important and to
safeguard effort and research, essential.  But to some I think it is like
getting a star named after oneself.

Peter Smith.