Idiots blocking HID torches from USA market

If you look at the patent you willsee that he has not dedigned a hid balast,
he is using the Welch allyn lamp. he has only designed the enclosure wihich
is a simple job to do. He is also using wet connectors another industry
standard.

Overall the only thing he has designed is a water tight container to house
other peoples components.


"Zak" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message news:2m76ldFjp5u0U1@uni-berlin.de...
>
> "Andrew Pitkin" <apitkin@NOSPAMbtinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:cdl84u$c3o$1@sparta.btinternet.com...
>
> > Using a different kind of bulb (effectively) that is more efficient,
> > underwater, hardly counts as an original idea. I believe though that the
> US
> > patent system works like this - you have an idea, apply for a patent and
> > then the lawyers fight over it. In the UK each patent application is
much
> > more carefully assessed and therefore it is much more difficult to have
> one
> > awarded. I don't think it will happen here.
> >
> > Andy
> >
> >
>
>
> I think you'll find WA stated that it wasnt possible to build a
submersible
> HID/Ballast and adequately manage the cooling of the beast.
>
> As far as Im aware, Carl registered the patent because he was getting fed
up
> of a certain large florida based manufacturer cloning his designs and
making
> a fortune. Said manufacturer also being somewhat aggressive in its pursuit
> of patents themselves, this would seem to have been a wise move.
>
> Its a shame if that patent is being executed upon as aggressively as
> suggested in the original post, however I suspect its probably a stance
> designed to generate an opportunity for people to license the patent.
>
> /Zak
>
>
>
>

"Zak" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message news:2m76ldFjp5u0U1@uni-berlin.de...
>
>
> I think you'll find WA stated that it wasnt possible to build a
submersible
> HID/Ballast and adequately manage the cooling of the beast.

Where and when did they say that? If they did, their UK distributor, BFI
Optilas, knew nothing about it when I first contacted them several years ago
about using WA HID components for homebuilt UW lights. They were very
interested in the idea of their Solarc lamps being used underwater. I
specifically discussed the cooling issue with them and one concern was that
the lamps may end up being overcooled in water, especially with a test-tube
design.

> As far as Im aware, Carl registered the patent because he was getting fed
up
> of a certain large florida based manufacturer cloning his designs and
making
> a fortune. Said manufacturer also being somewhat aggressive in its pursuit
> of patents themselves, this would seem to have been a wise move.
>
> Its a shame if that patent is being executed upon as aggressively as
> suggested in the original post, however I suspect its probably a stance
> designed to generate an opportunity for people to license the patent.

I can understand Carl's frustration, but surely as a small manufacturer up
against the legal budget of a big manufacturer he's picking the wrong fight,
given the way the US patent system works?

Plymouth <Plymouth.19rmgb@forums.deeperblue.net> wrote in message news:<Plymouth.19rmgb@forums.deeperblue.net>...
> To apply for the Patent in the UK, according to the Patent website, they
> must not have released the idea in public before application to aquire a
> patent. Any pior release or showing of the product would seriously mess
> up their chances of getting one granted here.
>
Yeah, but the patent office aren't paid to check that much (if they
encountered it in theuir daily lives then you wouldn't get the patent
- that's about it). They also won't check whether somebody else has
exactly the same patent before you. It's your problem if you file a
totally useless patent and waste your money.

Alun Harford

"Keith Lawrence" <false@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<40fe24ea$0$58816$5a6aecb4@news.aaisp.net.uk> ...
> "Andrew Pitkin" <apitkin@NOSPAMbtinternet.com> wrote
>
> > I believe though that the US patent system works like
> > this - you have an idea, apply for a patent and
> > then the lawyers fight over it.
>
> Our American friends seem to have a completely different view of a patent.
> The HID issue comes as no surprise, don't forget that US drug companies have
> been 'patenting' DNA sequences. I'm sure there's a land shark (lawyer)
> somewhere who would argue that your existence infringes some patent or
> other!

Of cause you can patent some of the genomic information (it's not
actually the sequence - normally a method of turning it on or off or
something else)
I guess I should know EXACTLY what because I'm doing a lot of
bioinformatics stuff at the moment, but I don't know exactly.
Nobody bothers to patent them any more, even in the US, because they
can't be enforced so everybody just ignores them (particularly on
human - less so on other species).

Alun Harford

"Dave H" <remove.davidharrison@bpss.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:cdm7ge$qbo$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
> Q, you are in a room with a shark, bear & a lawyer. You have a gun with 2
> bullets, which do you shoot?
>
> A. The lawyer: twice.


Alternatively:

Q. Why don't sharks eat lawyers?

A. Professional courtesy.

Cliff.

On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 04:50:48 -0700, Alun Harford wrote:

> Yeah, but the patent office aren't paid to check that much (if they
> encountered it in theuir daily lives then you wouldn't get the patent
> - that's about it). They also won't check whether somebody else has

Or you might get it anyway. Some guy in America got a patent on a swing.
And some Australian recently patented the wheel. So they don't appear to
be checking much at all. And Microsoft recently took one out on double
clicking.

Jason

--
See http://www.scuba-addict.co.uk/ for trip reports including
the Costa Blanca, Gibraltar, Gran Canaria and the UK

On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 19:33:14 +0100, Jason
<jason.news.nospam@ntlworld.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 04:50:48 -0700, Alun Harford wrote:
>
>> Yeah, but the patent office aren't paid to check that much (if they
>> encountered it in theuir daily lives then you wouldn't get the patent
>> - that's about it). They also won't check whether somebody else has
>
>Or you might get it anyway. Some guy in America got a patent on a swing.
>And some Australian recently patented the wheel. So they don't appear to
>be checking much at all. And Microsoft recently took one out on double
>clicking.
>
>Jason

My favourite is someone patenting 'using a laser pointer to play with
your cat'. Not the laser pointer, just the pointing it at things to
make the cat jump on them.

I keep meaning to patent my own DNA before anyone else does.
-------------------------------------
York BSAC Web Page:
http://website.lineone.net/~york_bsac

> My favourite is someone patenting 'using a laser pointer to play with
> your cat'. Not the laser pointer, just the pointing it at things to
> make the cat jump on them.

How about using a torch to make lionfish eat things? Along the same lines,
but more topical :O)

You have to wonder at the world sometimes - crazy!

David

"Cliff Coggin" <clifford@ccoggin.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:cdocdg$bcc$1@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> "Dave H" <remove.davidharrison@bpss.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:cdm7ge$qbo$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
>> Q, you are in a room with a shark, bear & a lawyer. You have a gun with
>> 2
>> bullets, which do you shoot?
>>
>> A. The lawyer: twice.
>
>
> Alternatively:
>
> Q. Why don't sharks eat lawyers?
>
> A. Professional courtesy.

Heh! Even sharks have feelings, you know...

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 18:01:24 +0100, "Dave H"
<remove.davidharrison@bpss.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>Q, you are in a room with a shark, bear & a lawyer. You have a gun with 2
>bullets, which do you shoot?
>
>A. The lawyer: twice.

No, no, no.

If a shark is in a *room*, it's dead or dying. In other words, it's
actually a red herring...

You shoot the lawyer *once*, so s/he can't get away from the bear.

You keep one bullet, in the case the bear is still hungry after it's
finished with the lawyer...

Mike
http://www.corestore.org

'As I walk along these shores
I am the history within'