wuffwaff
Oooops! Okay, I'll redraw it. What about the point I've made about the common ground, does it make sense to anyone but me?
Upstream noise cancellation circuits like the "X" super symmetry allow new thinking in the way of audio power supply designs and my idea and its intention to exploit these new symmetrical noise cancellation capabilities in a power supply design may qualify as a new and patentable approach so notice is hereby give that if there is no prior art, or previous publication or predated public record describing the topology offered and the intention of its use herein this thread and readable in my posts, I claim the common mode ground used with the upstream X-type cancellation as my own and I intend to file a patent accordingly.
Oooops! Okay, I'll redraw it. What about the point I've made about the common ground, does it make sense to anyone but me?
Upstream noise cancellation circuits like the "X" super symmetry allow new thinking in the way of audio power supply designs and my idea and its intention to exploit these new symmetrical noise cancellation capabilities in a power supply design may qualify as a new and patentable approach so notice is hereby give that if there is no prior art, or previous publication or predated public record describing the topology offered and the intention of its use herein this thread and readable in my posts, I claim the common mode ground used with the upstream X-type cancellation as my own and I intend to file a patent accordingly.
Attachments
The same conditions apply to this as with my previous patent applications exposed via this public forum. Any and all diyaudio members may use this idea in their designs as long as it is not for profit or part of a commercial product or enterprise. If it is used for commerical purposes, you must obtain my written consent or forfeit all profits persuant from its use.
yldouright,
I would back off the "X" or "Super Symmetry" patent idea. The patent is owned by Nelson Pass and it is his IP. Your knowledge of electronics seems limited and I don't think you have a grasp on what Fred was saying about the noise cancellation ability of "Super Symmetry". It's a good way to get yourself in a lawsuit.
I would back off the "X" or "Super Symmetry" patent idea. The patent is owned by Nelson Pass and it is his IP. Your knowledge of electronics seems limited and I don't think you have a grasp on what Fred was saying about the noise cancellation ability of "Super Symmetry". It's a good way to get yourself in a lawsuit.
For all you naysayers
There are number people and idea people and both make value. No one here will dispute that GRollins reached far beyond his Electrical Engineering background when he came up with the brilliant concept of the Aleph-X. He was resented bitterly for that advancement by people jealous of his acheivement who thought, I know more than him so how dare he. Well, the fact is he dared to do and he did. Others contributed to the base of his idea, helped it along and refined it but it was his concept and idea just as what I presented is mine. There is nothing in patent law which prevents you from using another persons patent as a reference or building block in your own so keep your trepidations to yourself. The matter can be disputed in a courtroom if it ever becomes necessary. You may laugh if you like but it won't stop me from serving you a petition so 'suit' yourself (pun intended).
There are number people and idea people and both make value. No one here will dispute that GRollins reached far beyond his Electrical Engineering background when he came up with the brilliant concept of the Aleph-X. He was resented bitterly for that advancement by people jealous of his acheivement who thought, I know more than him so how dare he. Well, the fact is he dared to do and he did. Others contributed to the base of his idea, helped it along and refined it but it was his concept and idea just as what I presented is mine. There is nothing in patent law which prevents you from using another persons patent as a reference or building block in your own so keep your trepidations to yourself. The matter can be disputed in a courtroom if it ever becomes necessary. You may laugh if you like but it won't stop me from serving you a petition so 'suit' yourself (pun intended).
Sorry to say you missed again........
yldouright,
Like Kilowatsky allready stated, all credits go to Mr. Pass concerning patents and ideas wrt. X-technology.
Mr. Nelson Pass kindly granted and "helped" Mr. Grey Rollings to "reverse engineer" his patents as used in his comercial products.
Reading the forum thoroughly helps.......
yldouright,
Like Kilowatsky allready stated, all credits go to Mr. Pass concerning patents and ideas wrt. X-technology.
Mr. Nelson Pass kindly granted and "helped" Mr. Grey Rollings to "reverse engineer" his patents as used in his comercial products.
Reading the forum thoroughly helps.......
byteboy
I will attribute this last post of yours to the fact that English is not your native tongue. I will tell you that reading requires understanding and from your post, I am getting the impression that you do more of the former and less of the latter. Reread my posts again until the light goes on in your head.
I will attribute this last post of yours to the fact that English is not your native tongue. I will tell you that reading requires understanding and from your post, I am getting the impression that you do more of the former and less of the latter. Reread my posts again until the light goes on in your head.
I know a little about international patent law from when I was involved with helping to develop a new concept in stage lighting controllers. Prior disclosure always invalidates a patent application, it's that simple. If you want to patent something, you must keep it quiet until after you have applied.
pinkmouse
Disclosure without a statement of intention is indeed as you say in International Law because it then becomes public domain or 'free public knowledge' if you will but this was not the case in my post. I know you are a moderator and are trying to help but please post more prudently in the future.
Disclosure without a statement of intention is indeed as you say in International Law because it then becomes public domain or 'free public knowledge' if you will but this was not the case in my post. I know you are a moderator and are trying to help but please post more prudently in the future.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.