Actually Preacher, it's my understanding that if it can be proven that
Rob's design does in fact pre-date the filing of the patent, the patent
will be denied (if it's pending) or nullified (if it's been granted).
You can't hold a valid patent on something if there is prior art.
Preacher wrote:
>
> At 04:19 PM 8/3/2000 -0400, you wrote:
> > I am not sure of the exact date, but I do know that it has been
> >on-line since March of 1997 at the latest. According to them,
> >Rob's traction bars are "an exact replica". If they are just getting
> >their patent now, do they have a case? Does anyone have any
> >suggestions?
>
> I believe that any design that predates the patent, whether exact in
> substance or even close, would be exempt. However, if taken to court, he
> would have to prove that his design predated the patent! The easiest way to
> do this is if he has any snail-mailed correspondence with ANYONE concerning
> his design that was post-marked prior to the patent application.
> Unfortunately, the Website alone might not stand up in court without
> supporting evidence. I would, however, check with the hosting sight to see
> if they keep logs of uploads, revisions etc.
-- -andyhttp://home.twcny.rr.com/andylevy/ --- andylevy@bigfoot.com ------------------------------------------------------------- "I spilled spot remover on my dog. He's gone now..." --- Steve Wright -------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 11:53:15 EDT