Originally posted by __rich__
Have they patented the Pendant?
Because Bearden was granted a patent for his device.
I thought any devices had to actually do what they claim to be patentable?
You mean his little MEG transformer rig? Ever see him actually produce power with it? Because last time he was really pushing it, he was trying to use
a sine wave RMS meter on a very non-sinusoidal waveform, which is not that rare of a mistake for a beginner.
However, I thought the dog ate his homework in 2005, when his only working prototype was destroyed by a MIB. (also a fairly common statement for a
huckster)
And no, it doesn't actually have to work. You can patent anything that appears to be functional and meets the other criteria, such as not being
obvious to people skilled in the art. We've filed patents before we had the thing working before, and didn't file fast enough in others, which is a
big dammit either way - both waste your time, but doing it too slowly wastes your money.
Now had Tom said "it's a perpetual motion machine" he'd have been denied up front, but there are few technically apt patent examiners, and as long
as you don't come off like a total idiot or use certain key phrases, you'll likely get the patent as long as it's not blatantly the same as someone
else's.
edit: I think the only case in which you have to produce a working model and demonstrate it to the examiner is the one where you claim to have a
perpetual motion machine. For all else, it's how you sell the examiner on the merits of the thing. If it looks reasonable, they don't question it.
I'm not sure where people pick up the concept that "if it's patented, it must be REAL!", because it's nothing of the sort. However, you can at
times pick up some real good info there, with the proviso that a lot of people occasionally leave out some bits and insert others that are not so
conducive to the thing working if you try to replicate it.
[edit on 25-7-2010 by Bedlam]
Anyway, my philosophy is that if it whacks you like a vector, it's a vector.
