Nate I know what patents are all about. In this country alone
I have been involved with three patents for G.E where naturally
an attorney is hired. For patents outside the workplace I do
my own without hiring an attorney. As far as providing the
data up front why should I do that, as a former teacher I found
that when someone does homework memory alone is not enough.
it takes two people to share information and I am doing my part.

On this newsgroup I have given plenty of data that when pursued
by personal work will provide agreement, the dissent from couch
recliners is to be expected.
I have put my money down in earnest, I am not just waving my hands.


Nate Bargmann wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 10:25:56 -0800, art wrote:

yuri I put my money where my mouth is, it cost me a lot to apply
for another patent.

Getting a patent merely proves that one is able to hire a competent
enough patent attorney to convince the patent examiners that the
application in question isn't the rehash of prior patents. Enough bogus
software patents are issued on an ongoing bases to bear this out. A
patent is not proof of sound engineering even though the public at large
has been hoodwinked into believing otherwise.

Without field strength/antenna range data, any other claims are akin to
shouting in the wind. Your money doesn't matter, show us the data.

- Nate

--

"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds,
the pessimist fears this is true."