Re: [ATM] Too Small Optics-( and flex produced optics)

["David Harbour" <scarab2@cox.net>]

Ken,

You are absolutely right. I was also told by someone in the know, when I got
my last PPA finished ("Provisional Patent Application") finished, that a
copyright on the finished document (or even a similar document, well
illustrated, but in lay language) holds more weight in a court than the
patent. My last astronomical instrument patent covered 3 (three) different,
and entirely novel mechanical improvements for fork mounts; patent #
4,901,072 .

Patenting is the least important part of getting your good idea to market.

"With a patent and 76 cents, you can buy a cup of coffee at McDonald's"

P.S.- My last little invention was pretty clever- everyone on the planet
could have used it; no moving or detachable parts; I called it "A Miniature
Capstan or Windlass for Shortening a Length of Line Already Secured at Both
Ends".

I wouldn't seek a patent ever again, now- left a bad taste in my mouth.
There is simply too much resistance on the part of people to new ideas. I
have devised a radical new improvement for short takeoff landing airplanes,
but no one is interested; it makes the airplane vastly safer (wing tips
stall proof at any speed, any angle of attack) and other wonderful features.
Couple of thousand hours writing and illustrating, to no advantage, is
enough for me. Patents- bah! I'd rather push glass, or talk to my buddies on
this list.

By the way, a patent search will reveal that even the patent office does not
follow its own rules: each patent is supposed to represent something "new",
"novel", never heretofore seen." So much B.S.- I saw many, many granted
patents of IDENTICAL  gizmos. What a laugh.

Dave

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ken Lowther" <hermit@outofoptions.org>
To: <atm@atmlist.net>
Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2005 6:58 AM
Subject: RE: [ATM] Too Small Optics-( and flex produced optics)


>
> The patent office is severely broken in the US.  They issue patents and
> let the courts settle whether or not they are worth the paper they are
> written on.
>
> Ken
>
> Quoting john sherman <atm@mail.johnspics.com>:
>
> >
> > hi Jerry,
> >
> >> you could tighten a large industrial strength
> >> hose clamp around the circumference making it smaller.
> >> ...
> >> OK, OK, I see now. It is feasible. I think this idea
> >> could warrant a patent.
> >
> >
> > Go ahead, get the patent. But try it first, before spending the money.
> >
> > I once had a beautiful sphere that I tried to parabolize with hose
> > clamps around the edge (there is one on this list who remembers). The
> > force exerted by the clamps has to be perfectly even at every point
> > on the edge. In my setup, it was not. So there was some atrocious
> > astigmatism.
> >
> > Good luck,
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ATM mailing list http://www.atmlist.net/
> >
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
>
> _______________________________________________
> ATM mailing list http://www.atmlist.net/
>


_______________________________________________
ATM mailing list http://www.atmlist.net/