3 ms·

This situation is the perfect, legitimate situation where patents make sense. I really wonder why Andrea Rossi doesn't simply patent his invention, and let the

This situation is the perfect, legitimate situation where patents make sense. I really wonder why Andrea Rossi doesn't simply patent his invention, and let the whole world know how - and if - it really works.

ywang0414 13y ago
There's an informal italian patent on this. But not an international one, because "offend against the generally accepted laws of physics and established theories".
- danmaz74 13y ago
  The real difference is in disclosing the "secret sauce": a patent needs to disclose it, that's the whole point of patents. If that's not so, then it isn't really a patent on this (supposed) invention.
  - teamonkey 13y ago
    The parent was saying that there are clauses in international patent law that prevent applications for devices such as this, mainly because of time wasting and fraud.
  - danmaz74 13y ago
    @teamonkey: if so, ok. I was also forgetting something I had studied (being Italian): in Italy patents aren't awarded after an examination, they basically just certify the date of your claims. The whole examination and discussion of the patent are left to a trial, if there is ever one regarding it. I guess that' what the OP meant by "informal" patent.
mtgx 13y ago
This is why I want patents to be limited by how much work was put into creating that "invention". If it only took you a couple of days to come up with it and implement it, then I seriously doubt it's a world changing invention, and something others couldn't have come up with, anywhere in the world. What Andreas is doing will obviously take more than a few days to invent.
- wtvanhest 13y ago
  We definitely need to change patent law, but requiring something to take time to be patentable does not seem like a good strategy. 1) Most break through inventions can be broken down in to smaller, patentable parts. Every patentable part at some point was "created" in an instant, rather than days. 2) You could use the logic to argue that software patents make perfectly good sense by saying that you had to spend years experimenting with software, learning what code works and what code doesn't work and understanding the market for various devices before coming up with your groundbreaking software patent on XYZ.
grecy 13y ago
Elon Musk covered this. They don't patent things at Space X because their primary competitors are governments, and patent enforceability against governments is questionable at best. I think the same applies here.
- danmaz74 13y ago
  This is an interesting point, but the situation here is very different. For space launches there is a very little market, and if eg the Russians undercut you your potential customers will go to them and you're going to lose money. For electricity instead there is so much demand to satisfy that the inventor could make MUCH more money than he ever dreamed of just selling it in the Countries that would respect his patent.

ywang0414 13y ago

There's an informal italian patent on this. But not an international one, because "offend against the generally accepted laws of physics and established theories".

danmaz74 13y ago
The real difference is in disclosing the "secret sauce": a patent needs to disclose it, that's the whole point of patents. If that's not so, then it isn't really a patent on this (supposed) invention.
- teamonkey 13y ago
  The parent was saying that there are clauses in international patent law that prevent applications for devices such as this, mainly because of time wasting and fraud.
- danmaz74 13y ago
  @teamonkey: if so, ok. I was also forgetting something I had studied (being Italian): in Italy patents aren't awarded after an examination, they basically just certify the date of your claims. The whole examination and discussion of the patent are left to a trial, if there is ever one regarding it. I guess that' what the OP meant by "informal" patent.

mtgx 13y ago

This is why I want patents to be limited by how much work was put into creating that "invention". If it only took you a couple of days to come up with it and implement it, then I seriously doubt it's a world changing invention, and something others couldn't have come up with, anywhere in the world. What Andreas is doing will obviously take more than a few days to invent.

wtvanhest 13y ago
We definitely need to change patent law, but requiring something to take time to be patentable does not seem like a good strategy. 1) Most break through inventions can be broken down in to smaller, patentable parts. Every patentable part at some point was "created" in an instant, rather than days. 2) You could use the logic to argue that software patents make perfectly good sense by saying that you had to spend years experimenting with software, learning what code works and what code doesn't work and understanding the market for various devices before coming up with your groundbreaking software patent on XYZ.

grecy 13y ago

Elon Musk covered this. They don't patent things at Space X because their primary competitors are governments, and patent enforceability against governments is questionable at best. I think the same applies here.

danmaz74 13y ago
This is an interesting point, but the situation here is very different. For space launches there is a very little market, and if eg the Russians undercut you your potential customers will go to them and you're going to lose money. For electricity instead there is so much demand to satisfy that the inventor could make MUCH more money than he ever dreamed of just selling it in the Countries that would respect his patent.