Open Source Vs. Patenting

[omnispace]

And so If I were to share with this forum, could say a company or corp. use it as it would now be out in the open?

Maybe, but remember, all (or most) patents on file with the patent office can be viewed freely.  They are "out in the open", and there's not much you could do if some company in China / 3rd world country decided to infringe your patent.

If you wrote up a license agreement, it could be specific for certain people on the forum.  That way you could decide who could legally use the device (at least in countries that with strong IP enforcement).  I suppose a company could create a forum persona, and you wouldn't know if they were a real person or not.

[cyclops]

Thanks Omni, I believe I will post a video of my device soon, as it seems to me that it would be the right thing to do.

[mapsrg]

The first patents were issued in Venice and usthered in an era of massive growth as opposed to the dark ages.....IF the UN was worth anything there should of been an international agreement on patents by now...but no.Still technological advancement  like free energy cannot be limited once it is revealed....it would become the standard because of economic impact and its impact would free the world from its shackles in so many different ways.

[ashtweth_nihilisti]

It wont happen, and its no where NOW.

The argument is over my friends,  ALL would be patent holders are worried about the open source money loss side of it. Well empirical cases prove that thats NOT the case. Open source can get renumeration, and its the only way to get safety and ENSURE (read that again) dissemination. I don't want to hear that others are different with patenting as they have no technology out there,  where is it? be out next week?.Sorry. Its no where. Steron is no where, Steven Ryan is no where, EBM is no where(these are modern cases with technology already ready to market and patented) Why are you the patent holders different? you will do some thing different then they did? LOL Sorry you can do nothing they didn't do.

The argument is over about not being able to make money from open source.Ossie Freedom did that with a  booster (http://www.overunity.com/hho.htm) he open sourced it and now makes 3-4 million per year in book sales.If i need to explain WHY a patent limits the inventor then i am afraid the patent holder is not of sound mental mind.

For what ever reason the patent holder with free energy technology may feel

Open source can get you money
Open source IS THE ONLY SECURITY (given the nature of free energy technology politically)
Open source gets out in REAL TIME

So whats the excuse? there is none.

Ash

[utilitarian]

It wont happen, and its no where NOW.

The argument is over my friends,  ALL would be patent holders are worried about the open source money loss side of it. Well empirical cases prove that thats NOT the case. Open source can get renumeration, and its the only way to get safety and ENSURE (read that again) dissemination. I don't want to hear that others are different with patenting as they have no technology out there,  where is it? be out next week?.Sorry. Its no where. Steron is no where, Steven Ryan is no where, EBM is no where(these are modern cases with technology already ready to market and patented) Why are you the patent holders different? you will do some thing different then they did? LOL Sorry you can do nothing they didn't do.

The argument is over about not being able to make money from open source.Ossie Freedom did that with a very crappy booster (water4gas) he open sourced it and now makes 3-4 million per year in book sales.If i need to explain WHY a patent limits the inventor then i am afraid the patent holder is not of sound mental mind.

For what ever reason the patent holder with free energy technology may feel

Open source can get you money
Open source IS THE ONLY SECURITY (given the nature of free energy technology politically)
Open source gets out in REAL TIME

So whats the excuse? there is none.

Ash

I am confused.  You are citing examples of Steorn and EBM, which have produced nothing because they have nothing.  It is not a patent issue, it is an inablitiy-to-produce issue.

Interestingly, there is an equal amount of open-source working free energy devices - zero.