Friday 17 December 2010

Don't patent Bessler's wheel!

Over the years I have questioned the prudence of patenting an invention such as Bessler's wheel. After much deliberation I eventually came to the conclusion that if I was fortunate enough to succeed in building my own version of the wheel, I wouldn't patent it.

I know the subject has been discussed numerous times on the besslerwheel forum and I'm aware of the current opinions being aired, but I was delighted to receive an email from a regular correspondent who directed my attention to a book called, "DON’T File a Patent!" by John D. Smith (Smith Press, 200 pages, $24.95) . I'm not saying I agree with the bombastic tone of the chapter headings and I haven't even read the book, but the concept struck a chord with me and I was pleased to note that I am not alone in questioning the validity of the argument that the right course is, necessarily, to patent.

Some people have ascribed my decision not to patent, to ethical or moral values, but that is not the whole picture. I do in fact believe that this particular invention, if it were successful, should be freely available and without let or hindrance (by which I mean,without anyone or any organisation, having the right to prevent anyone else from building, using, selling or in any other way benefiting from it, however they wish.)

No, there are other reasons why I am sceptical of patenting. One is that in the first place it is costly - enormously so.  Yes of course I know that the costs of such an invention could be recouped a million times over, but this is a cost that grows with time, as you try to cover international patents and their annual fees.  The sheer amount of paperwork would be more than enough to defeat my enthusiasm.  But it is not the cost alone which causes me concern.

There is the policing of the patent. No patent office bothers to protect your patent, they only issue them. You have to consider whether it is worth taking every infringement to court; such an invention will attract every fly-by-night operator in the world, every far Eastern fabricating engineer trying to make a living; every one, in fact, who is looking for ways and means of feeding his family. Would you wish to act against everyone of them? A patent won't protect you against these. You might decide to just take legal action against the big boys but they will have done their homework and even if you win, you will have spent time and money you'd rather not and maybe you won't win.

But there is one more issue concerning infringement which I believe has not been considered or if it has, it has been ignored, and that is the psychological and physical impact experienced in defending your patent; no one seems to consider patent infrinegements other than as a legal challenge but I know, for myself at least, that it would be very distressing and also alarming and irritating to fight a continual battle against those who would try to circumvent your patent.

But these issues are nothing compared to the distinct possibility that your concerned government might see fit to step in and forbid your patent, and tie you up in legal bonds which would prevent you even talking about your device. Then where would the value of your patent lie? The important thing to consider is this; you apply for a patent to protect your invention, and presumably you do this for one or two reasons. Firstly you want to earn some money to secure you and your family's future; nothing wrong in that. Secondly you wish to preserve some control over how it is used. Again a reasonable intent. But if you lose the patent through governent inteference, where's the security in that? Who would control it then? It seems to me that if there is even the slightest possibility of that happening, then you must forget patenting your invention.

So it's no to patenting Bessler's wheel - what then? You publish the details of how it works through newspapers, TV and of course the intenet. There will be enough interest generated to make many of the world's media companies rush to your door and make attractive financial offers to you for your story. This prospect might not seem desirable but do you think that, even in the case where you did apply for and did receive a patent, and the governments around the world welcomed it with open arms, that the media won't make the same concerted rush for your door? Of course they will.

So if you are lucky enough to have to make a choice, my advice would be to give it away and let market forces do their thing. 

JC

19 comments:

  1. John:

    I heard about that book on a radio interview. The author said his website is www.dontfileapatent.com. I went to the site--seems to have a lot of good information and chapter excerpts!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi John D. Smith! Apologies for my slightly negative comments about your style, when in fact I completely agree with your premise. Glad to meet you.

    JC

    ReplyDelete
  3. Here is a "parody" of the patent office...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTMJoy_z3Mg

    ReplyDelete
  4. Yes I saw that - funny, if it wasn't so true!

    JC

    ReplyDelete
  5. That only explains why patent office should close down.Or, you have army of technical lawyers.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I plan on assigning the patent of my device to an entity larger than me, my alma mater, and let them worry about defending it. All I'll have to do is sit back and receive royalties for 20 or so years.

    Axel

    ReplyDelete
  7. You know John,...perhaps you are right.
    It looks like a working wheel might present more problems than it took to solve it.
    I think the easiest route I would take would be just to register it with a lawer as the first.
    Then you would be free to enguage a manufacturer of your choice. In this way one would be free to make improvements and variations like a wheel that could work in space. There should be many spinoffs.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Trevor...aren't we counting the chickens before even they are hatched...when the wheel is successfully built by someone fame and money would eventually follow...

    But right now we should introspect and see where we stand...for 300 years this has been evading and now are we any closer....

    ReplyDelete
  9. Trevor E Dauncey.22 December 2010 at 07:14

    Suresh I am not counting chicken beforehand.When you have the formula you can make plans.
    The money will not follow if you are not dilegent.
    I knew a guy who invented the earth leakage system.The electricity conglomerates took it away from him and he got nothing,not even recognition.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I wish you guys would not worry about all this stuff and just focus on developing the wheel! Sure if you want to pass the time... But really, the wheel comes first. Good luck!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Trevor E Dauncey.22 December 2010 at 09:02

    Yes the wheel does come first, but it does stimulate one's enthusiasm to talk about it. Especially if you've been working on it for what seems forever.
    I realise you guys are getting impatient but just be encouraged by the fact that we are very close now.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Hi trevor,
    have been busy testing my design, Its put a smile on my face.
    Trevor have you considered using a cam ?

    Spinner.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Yes, especially a frictionless magnetic cam but of course it still only gives you just under unity out.Your only hope is to latch on to a force that only gravity can give you ie.gravity times velocity. All the best.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Trevor,
    what would you think if the cam resets the spring, using the spring for rotation without any effort for the reset, unlike cam spring devices as we know it.

    Spinner.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Spinner, that sounds very much like an equal unity syndrome. Think about what i've just said,..you can actually gain something from gravity.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Trevor,
    you will be surprised, there is a way to trick a cam using mechanics, that allows a cam to reset itself without any resistance.
    A normal cam system would be equal unity.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Trevor E Dauncey.22 December 2010 at 13:20

    I can relate to a mechanical model or drawing. Its hard to picture what you are doing.Can this blog do graphics?

    ReplyDelete
  18. trevor,
    The final build is a long way from being finished.
    The test wheel comfirmed the device works, though had not automated it, as it needed latches, the latch was not important to testing proof of principle, the idea of a cam being able to reset without resistance was the important test.
    When finished details will be posted, prefer to first finish the wheel.

    P.S. bessler shows the humble tool in the drawings.

    Spinner.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Good! That sounds promising.I know what you mean by using latches because they are important for stored energy.These things take a little to incorperate in the design.I know Bessler used latches.

    ReplyDelete

The True Story of Bessler’s Perpetual Motion Machine.

On  6th June, 1712, in Germany, Johann Bessler (also known by his pseudonym, Orffyreus) announced that after many years of failure, he had s...