John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
That all has Nothing to do with court room proceedings and lawyer strategies on a mostly non-technical jury who is more impressed with patents than you are.

Which is why patents are so often used for marketing purposes.

But it would be quite trivial for any defense attorney to disabuse even the most non-technical juror of the notion that patents are of any meaningful utility when it comes to proving whether or not something is complete BS.

se
 
easier said than done. And a lot cheaper.

Fact remains, a patent doesn't mean squat when it comes to whether or not the thing works and this would be easily demonstrated to even the most non-technical jury should it ever come to that.

And let's not forget that a lawsuit opens the plaintiff up this little thing called "discovery."

se
 
"We trust our measurements. We've no need for ears." :)

The problem is that people like you keep focusing on ears and neglecting the fact that they're plugged into an embarrassingly unreliable human brain.

You would continuously argue that square A is of a darker shade of gray than square B because well... just LOOK AT IT! It's blatantly obvious!

se
 

Attachments

  • graysquares.jpg
    graysquares.jpg
    25 KB · Views: 136
Last edited:
The problem is that people like you keep focusing on ears and neglecting the fact that they're plugged into an embarrassingly unreliable human brain.
I do have a big problem, though ... I listen to live music and it has a certain quality about it that I like -- and then I listen to most hifi systems and they have a quality about them I don't like. So it's a dilemma: either I accept the "proof" that "experts" have created audio systems as good as the 'real thing', or, I believe my ears ... maybe I should chuck a coin, perhaps ... :)
 
I do have a big problem, though ... I listen to live music and it has a certain quality about it that I like -- and then I listen to most hifi systems and they have a quality about them I don't like. So it's a dilemma: either I accept the "proof" that "experts" have created audio systems as good as the 'real thing', or, I believe my ears ... maybe I should chuck a coin, perhaps ... :)

It's perfectly fine to "trust your ears" when it comes to your subjective experience. That's the only thing that counts at the end of the day. Just don't try and pass off your subjective experience as anything more than that (i.e. by making objective claims) unless you're prepared to substantiate those claims with something more than your subjective experience.

se
 
Status
Not open for further replies.