[Stoves] Patent Protection or the Lack of It

[Harry Stokes]

Dear Dr. Karve,

Your words are very wise.  When others take credit for your ideas, you know
that you have won the argument.  This is an old saying among politicians.

For the thoughtful person, finding the answer and successfully conveying it
is worth more than a fortune!

Best wishes,

Harry

P.S. Congratulations on the recent Ashden Award

-----Original Message-----
From: stoves-bounces at listserv.repp.org
[mailto:stoves-bounces at listserv.repp.org] On Behalf Of adkarve
Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2006 6:46 AM
To: stoves at listserv.repp.org
Subject: Re: [Stoves] Central channel combustion stoves.
WasRE:HensonCenterFiure Burner System

I agree with Richard that it takes a lot of money to defend one's patent and
that the true winners are lawyers on both the sides. We have for instance
registered the design of our Sarai cooker. But a multimillionnare capitalist
has blatantly copied it and is selling it. We are just too small and too
poor to sue him. All we can do is to congratulate him for having decided to
do what we wanted to do,  namely to disseminate our technology!
I consulted an industrialist friend of mine about this. He told me that the
life of a patent is about 17 years. Any clever lawyer can keep the case
before the court of law undecided and pending for that period, and after the
17 years are over, the case is thrown out, because the cause for litigation
does not exist any longer.
Yours
A.D.Karve
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Stanley <rstanley at legacyfound.org>
To: Stoves List <stoves at listserv.repp.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 5:38 AM
Subject: Re: [Stoves] Central channel combustion stoves. Was
RE:HensonCenterFiure Burner System


> Dear stovers,
> The following  two  cents, on innovation and control and recognition
> stems from Paul's good insights this morning...
>
>   As Einstein put it (and probably several others before him) you cannot
> solve tomorrow's  problems with todays thinking (--or something to that
> effect) . This whole notion of ownership and intellectual property
> rights is fast becoming outmoded in light of the very internet
> mechanism we are now using to communicate. It is very likely that some
> cave (or cavish) person invented the wheel and that another discovered
> infrared reflectance, stack effect and pot scrubbing distances etc., in
> observing/ grunting/ burning himself/ herself around a simple wood
> fire.
>
> That they did not patent it, much less  articulate it in print, should
> not have ever been a license for us to ignore the strength of their
> experience and the lore which they directly or indirectly passed on to
> us.
>
> Instead we have now inherited this notion of protecting an idea as your
> own, defending it in our courts, making sure that if you can just tweak
> your idea a bit you can screw the other guy before he does you...great
> system for one culture working within itself, for a while anyway...
>
>   Nowhowever, comes the internet : All of the sudden we have to figure
> out how to keep our turf intact, while it is being exposed to everyone
> and their uncle globally --and we do not have Gates' money or influence
> to protect our ideas...
>
> Now lest we fall into a "socialist mess" like all "them commies" did...
> how does a good capitalist adapt to the emerging reality... How to
> participate and get paid for it in an open source environment.
>
> Does the word "Co-vent" with mutually agreed remuneration apportioned
> according to one's participation/ skills, make any sense? Does it make
> more sense to pre-plan distribution of the idea and the roles and the
> expectations up front, or do we continue to try to protect defend and
> play a rear guard action with beloved patents in the global reality of
> the internet.
>
> I can assure you that the silent masses of this planet will continue to
> slip quite efficiently by the WTO in their own survival ethic of
> adaptation and that the rest of us, the 20% odd, will never really be
> able to squeeze them enough to force them to buy a finished product,
> much less than an idea,  when it can be adapted locally. They rarely
> have the cash to buy it, they are nearly invisible from an
> administrative tracking standpoint  and they  are generally incredibly
> resourceful adaptors...
>
>   So how does the well intended innovator  pro-actively adapt to this
> reality:  Share out your idea and get screwed or pay it to a lawyer to
> protect it in which case the lawyer wins.
>
> Our own experience has led us to a notion of "conditional sharing"
> with the three caveats that they must 1) refer back to us and the
> others  we are working with and from whom we got the idea,   2)
> contribute their experience in adapting it and 3) kindly agree to
> becoming a referral for others as a resource person (as a private
> consultant or gratis: Its up to them). No legal force here just a push
> pull opportunity for the recipient. It works quite well actually --with
> individuals and small groups.
>
> So it goes. the 'conditional sharing' delivery system is far from
> perfect but its a start in the new age of internet based development
> assistance. Ideas on how to structure this--or not to structure it--are
> most welcome... its just a work in progress....but one which affects us
> all in the larger scheme of things.
>
>
> R Stanley
>
>
> a hollow core fire On Jun 7, 2006, at 8:13 AM, psanders at ilstu.edu wrote:
>


_______________________________________________
Stoves mailing list
Stoves at listserv.repp.org
http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves
http://www.bioenergylists.org