Some food for thought ...
eg,
>The owner of the GoldMoney bullion bars is the aggregate of all GoldGram
>account holders. It is impossible to identify which grams of gold in the
>vault belong to which account.
eg,
>There is a problem with this assertion, however. When I spend 1.0 GoldGrams
>to another person, a physical gram of gold does not pass through the wires
>of the Internet. For that matter, a physical 1 gram piece of gold does not
>exist in the ViaMat vault where GoldMoney stores gold for its account
>holders.
Yes, but that's the case in alomst ANY sale.
When you sell MSFT shares to Biff by telephoning your broker, the
"physical" certificates don't "pass through the internet"
MSFT shares -- as with most ownership described by clear title of
ownership - are not molecularly identifiable, you can't front to
Redlands and ask for half a dozen programmers and a small building if
you own a million MSFT shares.
Most real estate titles are non molecularly identifiable: you own
title to an apartment, it is just a share of a large building;
usually of the enterprise containing that building.
"actual" land titles (earth, real estate) (like "fee simple titles")
are notoriously non-molecularly-identifiable; there are endless
vagaries and sharings relating to what's under the ground, at
different depths, in the air (cf. air rights in Manhattan re tall
buildings), boundaries, etc.
you own a car with your wife, you cant identify each half's molecules.
Or let's say you buy a new car and get title to it:
40% of the VALUE of that thing is not the metal car per se, but the
5-year-100,000 mile warranty that Mercedes offer, which is a vague
sort of contract-thing with a public company entity and its network
of dealer-franchizes
This kind of "primitivist" "I really OWN this-here hammer in my
pocket" business applies only in very, very rare situations.
Actualy, whenever paperwork - titles, contracts, mortgages, deeds,
and the rest - is involved its hard to think of an example where you
sort of "molecularly own" anything.
>GoldMoney has not invented anything new. It has merely assembled a
>permutation of the prior arts of ...
I don't know what "invention" means legally, but patents (the legal
thing) in the US specifically talk about assembling permutations of
prior arts .. that's what you get a patent on.
>Since the GoldMoney patent claims that the invention of digital gold
>currency is distinctively different than a deposit currency because the
>account holder is the title owner of the gold in the vault, then as long as
>the other gold backed currencies do not make this claim, they cannot be in
>violation of the Turk Patent.
nah, they could be in violation for a zillion reasons. As you say ..
>Of course I am not a patent lawyer
Right. It's fascinating to discuss ideas about the patent(s) but
it's pointless to try to guess what will happen in court, I reckon.
>But let us hope for the sake of the free market that e-gold wins.
Well if one is an anti-patent generally sort of anarcho-libertarian
viewpoint -- fair enough.
As I've mentioned before, what the "actual" market needs (ie the
actual field of commerce here in Europe/USA today) is CERTAINTY, ie,
they need the patent battle to have BEEN FOUGHT, and over with.
I can't see that it makes any differences who wins.
The good thing is that the battle's been fought and settled.
When IBM/Walmart/Citybank come along and want to do DGC properly, if
James has won, then IBM/Walmart/Citybank will just unexcitedly
licence the technology.
When IBM/Walmart/Citybank come along and want to do DGC properly, if
Doug has won, then come along and want to do DGC properly, will
unexcitedly not license the technology.
If however IBM/Walmart/Citybank come along and want to do DGC
properly, and the patent issues had NOT been settled, then they'd
just say to themselves "oh, sad little amateurish industry, nothing
can be done there" .. you know?
It really also makes little difference who has the patent. If, as it
happens, egold had gotten in first and beaten gm to the punch, it
would be the other way around, but I can't see it would make any
difference for "the economy" or the industry as a whole -- so long as
the issues are settled and clear.
JP!
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"If it can't scale fast and big you got nuthin'"
-------------------------------------------------------------------
---
You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s)
via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common
viruses.
