When I worked for a large corporation, I spent a lot of time with their internal patent system. A core criteria for deciding which invention disclosures to pursue as a patent had to do with the detect-ability of an infringement. Basically, if you couldn't detect that a competitor was using your patent, it was not worthwhile to patent it.
Enforce-ability comes down to civil lawsuit. Courts award 1x damages for unknowing/accidental infringement and 3x damages for knowing/intentional infringement. But, it is an expensive process to litigate and the rewards of a positive outcome of the litigation must exceed the high cost of litigation by 1/risk. Most patent infringements don't get pursued for lack of sufficient return on the high cost of litigation. Those infringements that do get pursued usually end in settling out of court in a licensing arrangement. In Rossi's case, he hasn't delivered a product that could be evaluated for patent violation yet. So, Piantelli would not be able to build a case against Rossi until he releases a publicly available product that could be tested for violation. Normally, in important industries, you build patent portfolios to protect yourself against other company's portfolios - trading cross-licensing to keep yourself from being litigated. Rossi needs his own patent portfolio. Bob Higgins On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 8:45 AM, Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. <hoyt-stea...@cox.net> wrote: > Question about trade secrets and patent enforcement: > > > > How does a patent holder enforce his patents when a device with trade > secrets is by definition unavailable for examination, > > especially if the device is leased and reverse engineering is forbidden? > > > > As an example, Piantelli has a nickel-hydrogen patent. How could he > enforce that against Rossi if what's inside a Rossi device > > is a secret? > > > > Does a court have the power to force disclosure? > > > > Just curious. > > > > Hoyt Stearns > > Scottsdale Arizona US > > > ------------------------------ > [image: Avast logo] <http://www.avast.com/> > > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > www.avast.com > >
