wiggle drive propulsion application

This is my computer design of a similar drive as yours, but without using swashplates. Ref; to the Kjell-Effect. I didn’t know you was interested in Bul********.

 

Guys, let's please avoid insults and please keep the forum discussions polite to one another. Thank you.

 

I would love to. All you have to do is tell Boston to drop it.

 

Close, and is bordering on patent infringement. !
Becareful what you publish,
I really like how you have renamed it a Kjell talk about hijacking for your own glorification, this is obsured !
I won't' be posting anymore on this.

 

Dont get upsett. Why dont show us a drawing of your patented parts. I don’t think there is anything you can patent in your SwashDrive. In your video you don’t show anything how your drive is flapping the tails.

 

Why don't you buy one then take it to bits and measure everything.

 

I dont need to coppy any tail drive I inventad the first one in 1972.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0weQBMVlfGs

 

Don't know about the wiggle, but this invention seems to have the potential to cause a flap.

 

My friend has a Mirage hobby cat--its the biggest load of crap I have ever seen. He has spare drives incase they break. He let another guy try it and he couldnt pedal it , he was expecting one leg to push back the other but it did'nt work like that when one leg was down it had to be lifted up or the other would not go down --what a pllava.

It makes me laugh whaching grown men pedaling in this stuff.

 

Due your freind has Mirage hobby cat—or Hobie MirageDrive? The Hobie MirageDrive is a very good propulsion invents. Maybee mechanicaly it is complicado. I think it is possible to make it better.

 

whats a pllava ?

is that anything like an eating utensil ? or would it be more like a reference to some feminine hygiene devise, I guess I'm not clear on this whole pllava concept Frosty ?

Oh and patents,
Yes I hold several and yes its nothing more than a legal tool. Who ever has the most cash wins. Its pretty standard for the inventor of something useful ends up broke while the product makes millions for some corporation who is either producing it overseas or simply altering some small aspect of the design, and then arguing that although it still does the same thing as the original its not the original patented design. Its pretty much standard procedure. The lack of ethics in glaring. Same holds true for research papers, first to publish wins, doesn't always mean its the person who actually made the discovery or did the hard work. Its an ethics issue, they have whole classes on this in case anyone missed them and wants to learn more.

I have at least two companies developing a patent I hold, A, I can't really touch them until they go public, although, B, I can and have sent both a cease and desist order. As I said, its a legal tool. All they really have to do is play with it till they can change some small aspect.

Its called the illegal system, and it works just fine as long as you've got the deeper pockets.

Something we would all do well to realize before we go posting pictures or patent licenses, or even discussing some of our ideas with some of the less savory.

 

Mispelt,-- pallava or rumpus or comosion.

Sorry,--- English words.

 

mispelt

Never happens to me Frosty ;-)

 

What more would it possibly be?

U.S. patent law does not permit someone to manufacture it overseas and market it in the U.S. U.S. patent law also holds that someone must practice at least one of your claims *exactly* in order to violate your patent. That's the law. It means that you have to write a broad and well crafted patent if you want broad protection.

Many people write worthless patents because they either don't understand how it works or because they are forced by prior art to write very narrow claims. In other words, their patent is nothing more than a narrow work-around of an existing patent or prior art.

People have done "work-arounds" on my patents as well. If they manage to do a genuine/legal work-around, there is nothing unethical about it. If I've failed to fully protect my idea because I crafted the claims poorly, or because prior art prevented me from crafting broad sweeping claims, they are completely within their rights to compete as they would do anywhere else in the marketplace.

U.S. patent law holds that no one is permitted to practice your valid patent without a license. That means they can't do it for their own individual non-profit purposes, and they can't do it in a dark basement out of sight of the public in a dark basement, even for pure research. If you have a valid patent that is being infringed, and there's anything valuable about that patent, you can easily find a lawyer that will put a stop to it.

Far more likely these companies are practicing something you *wish* you had included in your patent, but either failed to because you didn't think of it at the time or because you were forced to write narrow claims due to prior art.

If you tell me the patent number you think they're violating, and the companies that are supposedly in violation, I will study your patents and tell you why they are not violating, or tell you how to stop them and recover damages.

They are not allowed to "play with it" at all. They are allowed to produce something similar if it does not practice at least one of your claims exactly.

Issued patents are public record by definition. You can't keep them secret.

 

Can You Patent Something That Already Exists?
What constitutes public dissemination of an idea is not always easy to discern. Sharing your idea with very large audiences freely, however, such as posting it on a website that can be accessed by anyone, will place the idea into the public domain and eliminate the possibility of obtaining a patent.