Posted by CWatters on November 5, 2011, 1:11 pm
On 04/11/2011 05:16, Morris Dovey wrote:
I believe he got the Italian patent but the USA patent application
doesn't contain full disclosure so it doesn't meet the rules for a
patent. You can read the patent examiners comments online.
I doubt you can get a patent for a secret catalyst, that would make the
patent too broad and stop any new catalyst being used to make energy.
Posted by CWatters on November 5, 2011, 1:05 pm
On 03/11/2011 21:01, Morris Dovey wrote:
He won't get a patent until someone figures out how it works and how to
prove that's how it works.
His current patent application doesn't provide enough information needed
to replicate what he's done and that's the whole point of the patent
Posted by Rick on November 4, 2011, 11:22 pm
Seems to me that In some ways this is not dissimilar to that of the inventor
of 'Starlite', a world shattering breakthrough, or merely another time
waster looking for their 15 minutes of fame?
Posted by Morris Dovey on November 5, 2011, 2:40 am
On 11/4/11 6:22 PM, Rick wrote:
One never knows, does one? :-)
Posted by CWatters on November 5, 2011, 3:48 pm
On 03/11/2011 17:40, Morris Dovey wrote:
What do you count as "ordinary proof"?
Thousands of people claim to have replicated the "water for fuel"
nonsense, homeopathy also is big business with millions claiming it works.