Special effects are not prior art. Demonstrating a feature does not give you prior art neither. Patents cover implementations. Two people can invent two diffe

Special effects are not prior art. Demonstrating a feature does not give you prior art neither. Patents cover implementations. Two people can invent two different methods to do the same thing. It is not the case that the first patent gives them a monopoly on the features. Just because the internal combustion engine (eg: with pistons) exists, doesn't mean that you can't patent a rotary engine (like Mazda did). Both are internal combustion engines, but the rotary engine uses a novel method. So long as your position requires pretending that patents are something other than they aren't your arguments are going to be logical fallacies. This article is thus nonsense.