Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Wonder Warthog

What the headline obviously means is that, in the absence of a patent protecting the technology, Rossi is forced to keep the “catalyst” as a trade secret, and devise some means of keeping that secret if he wants to protect his IP.


First, headlines should say what they “obviously mean” instead of being false.

Second, what you say is true about every invention and every inventor. If you choose not to pursue a patent, or you fail to get one, you need to keep your idea secret or others can legally copy it.

But once you have filed, you can do what you want, on the assumption that an eventual patent will secure the market.


53 posted on 06/09/2011 10:06:16 AM PDT by Atlas Sneezed (End the "Fiscal Fiasco" in 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]


To: Beelzebubba
"First, headlines should say what they “obviously mean” instead of being false."

True, but remember, we're talking about journalists here....not exactly the sharpest knives in the drawer.

"Second, what you say is true about every invention and every inventor. If you choose not to pursue a patent, or you fail to get one, you need to keep your idea secret or others can legally copy it."

Absolutely true. I have probably patented only about 5% of the innovations I've made over the years.

"But once you have filed, you can do what you want, on the assumption that an eventual patent will secure the market."

If you "assume" that the patent will issue, blab your IP, and it FAILS to issue, then you're screwed, big time. Which is where Rossi is.

60 posted on 06/09/2011 12:48:56 PM PDT by Wonder Warthog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson