RadioBanter - View Single Post - Penn State fractal antenna reduces unwanted lobes

November 4th 03, 05:49 AM

On 3 Nov 2003 18:31:43 -0800, (Art Unwin KB9MZ)
wrote:

Richard,
I think it is very bad what Penn State has done

In this case, ignorance is allowed as an excuse. After-all, we are
talking about academics who have no concept of the real world.

and they say they are going to
apply for a patent no less.

Let them, I certainly don't care.

They do have E mail contacts on their page
so if you send them a copy of your posting
then they will have to declare it to the
Patent Office with their initial request.
If what you are saying is what they are repeating
then congrats and kudo's to you.

Read it again, Art. The invention is in the humor and the
"obviousness" of it to a practitioner of the art. It is the patent
office that needs to be dope-slapped. No one has to do any "proving"
of claims to get a patent so in the end real work has no merit (and
what makes that comedy sketch a future liability to whoever ponies up
the bucks to buy a license to a technology built on shifting sand).

It would also
be interesting how the initial patent on Fractals was written
i.e was it a 'method' for producing a new series of designs
or limited to specific designs as it could make quite a difference
as far as the PTO is concerned. I would imagine they took the
first tack as to patent all forms in the family would
make it one very huge patent request

Art

Hi Art,

Fraudtenna's original application is apparent in the description part
of the submission. Equally obvious is that the brunt of the claims
were brutally clipped and they were left with a castrati so light in
its loafers as to carry only carping weight.

The only value of patents is in their being a depreciable asset. In
other words, valuable only to the bean counters to include in their
prospectus.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC