BobbyMike
Member
Registered: Dec 1999
Location: "Children are a gift from God, they are a reward"
Posts: 1049 |
Score a point for Mr. Warman, semantically he's right, doqbit*h is not dog*****. Neither is dogbit_h, dogbit-h, or doqbit@h. The problem is that (it's a proven fact!) the human brain doesn't read words it 'knows' letter-by-letter, it reads the entire word. Any human being (here using English as their 'first' language) will replace a blank space or a 'nonsense' symbol with the appropriate letter, in this case '*' becomes 'c'. No other letter fits.
This entire dialogue reminds me of being back in school and listening to someone trying to 'win' an argument by twisting around words, using implication, and ignoring direct questions. Kinda like the one kid in the Debate Club who loved to take indefensible positions and use verbal wordplay to squirm around the matter.
Mr. Warman, you do have a patent. That is a known fact. Whether it is a defensible patent is not proven. The Patent Office itself (as an agency, not an entity) admits that the chief problem they have is that it is they (the Patent Office) leave it up to the patent seeker to look for prior patents, or usage of an idea (or process) before they are granted a patent. The Patent Office doesn't have the manpower to do this.
Your case is a great example. You claim of 'inventing' the screen protect in the late '80s-early 90's seems to be pretty stronq- the one flaw I can personally detect comes from my own experience. In 1978 I bought my first watch, a Seiko Sports 100. Being choleric, I didn't immediatly read the manual. After about a week, I noticed that the crystal was looking strange. It seemed to be really dirty- I looked for the manual (I was looking for a phone # to call so I could yell at someone). On the first page was a notice that the watch came with a 'scratch protector' that covered the crystal. If you (the watch owner) didn't like it, you could remove it simply by picking the edge with your fingernail and peeling it off, and that was it! Since it was adhered on with static, and not adhesive, I didn't have to clean anything off my watch crystal after taking it off. I remember that pretty clearly because soon after that, BMXers (motocross bicyclers/ motorcyclers) started to use static film on their helmet visors during races as a way to keep them mud-free. We (my family) also sponsored a Japanese exchange student that summer (1978) who brought gifts from her home for us. My gift was a small Casio calculator (about the size of two matchboxes) that I still have. It too had a static cling screen protector. (FYI, both the watch and the calculator were 'electronic devices'.)
Using your own 'fan' analogy, that's like someone seeing a fan used to cool a room, designing a small fan to cool a car engine and trying to claim that they invented something and demanding that someone else who designed a fan to cool a desktop computer had to pay them royalties. You did not invent static film, you came up with a use for it.
This country was not formed around the letter of the law. It was formed around principles. The laws were written to uphold those principles. Often people, and organizations, use the letter of the law to trash the principles. You (Mr. William Warman, Bill Warman, Inventorb, or whatever you prefer) are trashing those principles. You, intentionally or not, 'mislead' the Patent Office by not using true due dilligence in your search for prior use. Now you are using that ill-gotten patent to whack other Americans with. It's a known fact that it's very expensive and time consuming to resolve patent issue suits, which is why you have been successful with the 'small fry' (EasyPeel) and impotent against large companies (Concept Kitchen). The threat of court time can cow (or bankrupt them) a small company, but a large company that has legal consul on retainer can ignore threats and just wait for you to initiate legal action.
I feel sorry for you. You have chosen to live in a devisive manner, striking out in anger and refusing to be a part of a civil society. The mark of a civil person is the ability of that person to be nice to those that inevitably disagree with them.
I'm a Christian so I choose to love you because my Saviour says that I should. Luckily for me, Jesus doesn't say I have to LIKE you.
(I like the rest of you.)
Michael Walters
[This message has been edited by BobbyMike (edited 07-27-2000).]
[This message has been edited by BobbyMike (edited 07-27-2000).]
[This message has been edited by BobbyMike (edited 07-27-2000).]
[This message has been edited by BobbyMike (edited 07-27-2000).]
|
07-27-2000 01:34 AM
)
Email This Page to Someone! |
Receive updates to this thread
]