Quote:
Originally posted by winewood
I admire Cathar. He is a good application guy for the known technology and he actually applies his understanding to a business model. I do question one thing. If I made a paperclip.. and didn't get a design patent, or technology patent. Could I stop or even be upset with anyone for making a paperclip that looked or performed on the same general principles?
If these scenarios are true (I don't know.. im asking..) why not capitolize on that principle.
Another question: Was cather the first person to use microchannels or small fins in any type of water cooling device? If anyone else has ever used a small fin and forced water over it... I don't understand why there is grounds for hostility.
If no patent exists, and Cathar has found the secret to efficiency, then I encourage morph to or anyone to be capitolistic.
If morph is violating a patent, then cathar has every reasonable grounds to be pissed. Which is true? I find it hard to take sides at all without knowing these answers. Can anyone help me understand this scenario?
|
I think 8Ball put it right. It's one of those old fashioned Gentlemans Agreements, that never seem to exist these days. Its all about how much $$$ you can get away with and who you can sue for how much.
As I understand it, even for a patent pending you are lookings at thousands of dollars, not something youe average guy can fork out in the off chance he might make a million.
Cathar was not pissed about Morph using his ideas, but he though it was a direct copy of the jet impingement and microchannel work, and that he was selling them in large amounts.
I think the issues is dead though and should be laid to rest.