Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:ANTICIPATING THE 1 MW DEMO
Jed wrote the cited text, not I. Without a patent Rossi is vulnerable, he made good publicity however has a very weak strategy and a dreadful reputation management.. Peter On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 5:27 PM, Roarty, Francis X < francis.x.roa...@lmco.com> wrote: > On Thursday, August 25, 2011 5:21 AM Peter wrote [snip] I do know about > trade secrets. I predict that a few months after corporations worldwide > realize the Rossi reactors are real, this trade secret will be broken in > dozens of corporations in the U.S., Europe, Japan and China. You can protect > a trade secret for a product with a niche market that calls for inside > knowledge, skill, and lots of art. Conventional catalysts are a good > example. You cannot protect a trade secret for a rather simple device that > is vital to every industry on earth, and that is worth hundreds of trillions > of dollars over the next 100 years.[/snip] > > ** ** > > Peter, > > I would agree that Rossi is “stuck” with a weak patent. If the > Rossi “trade secret” is the only catalyst that will work then he is indeed > very lucky as Jones Beene surmised BUT in the very unlikely event that he > has the theory correct then he would indeed deserve all the marbles. IMHO > the lengthy communications online and his investment with University of > Bologna reveals an ongoing struggle to leverage the secret recipe into > revealing the theory. He admitted as much initially but then later tried to > convince us he understood the underlying theory – He may honestly believe he > has figured it out but without a comprehensive explanation that starts with > how exactly the lattice environment and defects initiate the process, it > will not survive the rigors to which such a paradigm shifting patent will be > subjected. His procedures and materials are not even first generation > without the stable control loop tha t broke the contract with Defkalion. * > *** > > ** ** > > I predict that the turmoil will eventually fall out to a couple major > contenders like the Mac [Mills] and PC [Italian researchers] with a third > open source flavor like Linux based on expired patents and grand fathered by > existing enthusiasts researching the Patterson and Meyers cells. I hope > Rossi, Panatelli and Focardi all get some measure of reward but between > patent litigation and human nature they are likely to die broken men if they > don’t accept a big industry buy out. > > Regards > > Fran > > ** ** > > ** ** > > *From:* Peter Gluck [mailto:peter.gl...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Thursday, August 25, 2011 5:21 AM > *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com > *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:ANTICIPATING THE 1 MW DEMO > > ** ** > > Dear Jed, > > I think the best patent agents can improve a situation > > but cannot reverse a lost situation to one of a winner. > > If he had a compound X acting as catalyst, he could easily get a patent > protecting the E-cats against copying of > > the core with Compound X. Theoretically good, in practice > > a bit complicated and risky. > > peter > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 1:09 AM, Jed Rothwell > wrote: > > Jouni Valkonen wrote: > > Was this approach right or wrong, it can be debated. I think that it was > just wrong approach. > > I agree. Plus I think a test of a 1 MW reactor is fraught with > difficulties. It is much easier to test 1 to 10 kW. > > ** ** > > > > In my opinnion Rossi should have opensourced this technology back in 2009 > when he filed patent application. > > ** ** > > I think what you mean here is that he should have revealed the technology > in anticipation of getting a patent. Not that he should have given it away. > Some people have suggested he should give it away because it is so > important, and it will save so many lives. That would make him the most > generous philanthropist in history. I think it is asking too much that he > should be both a brilliant inventor and also a philanthropist. > > ** ** > > The problem with your plan may be that his patent is weak. He and Defkalion > have both said they will rely on trade secrets to protect their intellectual > property. That tells me his patent is weak. > > ** ** > > I do not know much about patents but his other patent seems weak. Very > weak. Like trying to stop an automobile with a spider's web. > > ** ** > > I do know about trade secrets. I predict that a few months after > corporations worldwide realize the Rossi reactors are real, this trade > secret will be broken in dozens of corporations in the U.S., Europe, Japan > and China. You can protect a trade secret for a product with a niche market > that calls for inside knowledge, skill, and lots of art. Conventional > catalysts are a good example. You cannot protect a trade secret for a rather > simple device that is vital to every industry on earth, and that is worth > hundreds of trillions of dollars over the next 100 years. > > ** ** > > I am only gues
RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:ANTICIPATING THE 1 MW DEMO
On Thursday, August 25, 2011 5:21 AM Peter wrote [snip] I do know about trade secrets. I predict that a few months after corporations worldwide realize the Rossi reactors are real, this trade secret will be broken in dozens of corporations in the U.S., Europe, Japan and China. You can protect a trade secret for a product with a niche market that calls for inside knowledge, skill, and lots of art. Conventional catalysts are a good example. You cannot protect a trade secret for a rather simple device that is vital to every industry on earth, and that is worth hundreds of trillions of dollars over the next 100 years.[/snip] Peter, I would agree that Rossi is "stuck" with a weak patent. If the Rossi "trade secret" is the only catalyst that will work then he is indeed very lucky as Jones Beene surmised BUT in the very unlikely event that he has the theory correct then he would indeed deserve all the marbles. IMHO the lengthy communications online and his investment with University of Bologna reveals an ongoing struggle to leverage the secret recipe into revealing the theory. He admitted as much initially but then later tried to convince us he understood the underlying theory - He may honestly believe he has figured it out but without a comprehensive explanation that starts with how exactly the lattice environment and defects initiate the process, it will not survive the rigors to which such a paradigm shifting patent will be subjected. His procedures and materials are not even first generation without the stable control loop that broke the contract with Defkalion. I predict that the turmoil will eventually fall out to a couple major contenders like the Mac [Mills] and PC [Italian researchers] with a third open source flavor like Linux based on expired patents and grand fathered by existing enthusiasts researching the Patterson and Meyers cells. I hope Rossi, Panatelli and Focardi all get some measure of reward but between patent litigation and human nature they are likely to die broken men if they don't accept a big industry buy out. Regards Fran From: Peter Gluck [mailto:peter.gl...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 5:21 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:ANTICIPATING THE 1 MW DEMO Dear Jed, I think the best patent agents can improve a situation but cannot reverse a lost situation to one of a winner. If he had a compound X acting as catalyst, he could easily get a patent protecting the E-cats against copying of the core with Compound X. Theoretically good, in practice a bit complicated and risky. peter On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 1:09 AM, Jed Rothwell mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com>> wrote: Jouni Valkonen mailto:jounivalko...@gmail.com>> wrote: Was this approach right or wrong, it can be debated. I think that it was just wrong approach. I agree. Plus I think a test of a 1 MW reactor is fraught with difficulties. It is much easier to test 1 to 10 kW. In my opinnion Rossi should have opensourced this technology back in 2009 when he filed patent application. I think what you mean here is that he should have revealed the technology in anticipation of getting a patent. Not that he should have given it away. Some people have suggested he should give it away because it is so important, and it will save so many lives. That would make him the most generous philanthropist in history. I think it is asking too much that he should be both a brilliant inventor and also a philanthropist. The problem with your plan may be that his patent is weak. He and Defkalion have both said they will rely on trade secrets to protect their intellectual property. That tells me his patent is weak. I do not know much about patents but his other patent seems weak. Very weak. Like trying to stop an automobile with a spider's web. I do know about trade secrets. I predict that a few months after corporations worldwide realize the Rossi reactors are real, this trade secret will be broken in dozens of corporations in the U.S., Europe, Japan and China. You can protect a trade secret for a product with a niche market that calls for inside knowledge, skill, and lots of art. Conventional catalysts are a good example. You cannot protect a trade secret for a rather simple device that is vital to every industry on earth, and that is worth hundreds of trillions of dollars over the next 100 years. I am only guessing here, but my impression is that Rossi is stuck. He seems to have no good method of protecting his intellectual property. That's awful. Assuming it works, it is the most valuable discovery in history and he deserves a trillion dollars in royalties. I fear he may get nothing. If he gets nothing in the end, this will be partly his own fault. His personality may be causing problems. But it seems to me his main problem is that this particular intellectual property is very tough to protect. I cannot think of a good marketing strategy. I wouldn't kn
