Re: FAT patents. Do we need to revive non-US?

[Hal Vaughan <hal@thresholddigital.com>]

On Wednesday 11 January 2006 08:30 pm, loos wrote:
> Em Qua, 2006-01-11 às 17:16 -0500, Michael Marsh escreveu:
> > On 1/11/06, Jochen Schulz <ml@well-adjusted.de> wrote:
> > > But you definitely have to come up with some soft of working
> > > implementation, be it hard- or software, I agree.
> >
> > Actually, that requirement was dropped awhile ago.  You only have to
> > roughly describe an implementation.  There are actually a lot of
> > patents that have been issued for "inventions" that won't work.  The
> > USPTO specifically disallows patents on alleged perpetual motion
> > machines, but has been known in recent years to grant patents on
> > perpetual motion machines masquerading under different names.
> > "Zero-point energy" is a particularly popular one.

But Zero-point energy works.

I know it does.

I saw Colonel Carter working with a zero-point module on Stargate SG1.

Hal