| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#8
June 19th 07, 06:06 PM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
|
|||
|
|||
Guy from university physics dept. makes claims to incite/provokeamateurs!
LA4RT Jon Kåre Hellan wrote:
Jim Lux writes: wrote: I did away with the helical windings on mine. And I still have good current distribution. And slightly less loss. But then you would have something that is prior art. It isn't prior art just because you did it. It isn't even prior art if you can prove you did it. It is only prior art if you published it. Or you can prove in some other way that the idea was well known among those skilled in the art, or obvious to them. 73 Jon That is completely incorrect in the US. Publication is NEVER required with respect to establishing prior art. At least two things automatically support "prior art" status: 1) Valid documentation (but not necessarily publication) of the prior art. This usually means something like a lab notebook entry, witnessed by others. 2) Shipping a product that contains the prior art. No notification or publication is required. There are undoubtedly other means of establishing prior art that do not require "publication". In the US, establishing prior art is a matter for courts and lawsuits, so YMMV. 73, Gene W4SZ |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Threaded Mode
