|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Group: nashville.general · Group Profile
Author: OlinOlin Date: Jan 11, 2008 15:43
"David Moffitt" weaselstomping.org> wrote in message
news:13odpl1j4qlrmb4@corp.supernews.com...>
> "Olin" comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:Iu-dnZ85NNVLfBvanZ2dnUVZ_vGinZ2d@comcast.com...
> |
> | "Paul Stevens" bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> | news:gAAhj.38249$k27.12910@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
> | >
> | > "Olin" comcast.net> wrote in message
> | > news:av2dnWbq69MJURvanZ2dnUVZ_q6mnZ2d@comcast.com...
> | >>
> | >> "Cyrus Afzali" wrote in message
> | >>
> | >>> I don't know what your prototype is, but if it's a gun, that's all
> | >>> find and good, but it doesn't really equal innovation. Guns aren't
> | >>> going to get people jobs or put the U.S. at the top of the
> industrial
> | >>> world in all facets unless we're talking about military expansion
> and
> | >>> the boon it brings to defense contractors.
> | >>>
> | >>
> | >> I don't know this particular innovation either, but I do know this.
> The
> | >> Gun Control legislation he's talking about does have ramifications
> well
> | >> beyond what most would consider as reasonable, as do many, many laws
> | >> passed by just about any collection of congress folk you'd care to
> name.
> | >>
> | >> I also know that it's not even a little bit easy to bring an
> innovation
> | >> to almost any well-developed field, even though there's no evidence
> at
> | >> all that the ONLY potentially effective firearm, or car, or
> television
> or
> | >> pick any other product has already been made and that all attempts to
> | >> bring one shall be met with the same stone wall that confronted Mr.
> | >> Tucker when he tried to make what truly was an innovative automobile
> in
> | >> his day.
> | >>
> | >> It's quite true that firearms are not the issue they once were for
> many
> | >> people, but what he was talking about was trying to bring something
> new
> | >> to the market, which has been made much more difficult by
> legislation.
> | >> Tack that onto the extraordinarily deep pockets of any established
> | >> industry and you have one more nail in the coffin of an inventor who
> may
> | >> actually have come up with an improvement to an existing product
> that'll
> | >> go over.
> | >>
> | >> It would seem that you've assumed his prototype was all about guns,
> just
> | >> guessing... from the BATF reference... but it could have been
> anything.
> | >> In this case, the issue really is about how difficult it is to bring
> a
> | >> new idea, and how incredibly easy it is to see that idea stolen
> through
> | >> "legal" channels... regardless of the industry toward which it is
> aimed.
> | >>
> | >
> | > The BATF reference was to the prototypes that I would like to make,
> but
> | > cannot. Prior to 1986, I could have filled out forms, obtained a
> letter
> | > from
> | > the local police of chief stating he was aware of what I wanted to do
> and
> | > had no objections to my proposed actions, been fingerprinted and
> | > photographed, had my background investigated by the FBI, paid a
> | > $200 fee, and waited for the BATF to give their permission for me to
> | > build my prototype. Any additional prototypes would require going
> through
> | > the whole process again.
> | >
> | > After 1986, forget it. I'd almost have to be one of the big name
> | > manufacturers to even think about building one of those prototypes.
> | > There is no legal way for me to do it as an individual.
> |
> | Still kind of beside the point. It is far more difficult in ANY industry
> to
> | bring a new innovation to market for any number of reasons. It's much
> easier
> | for the big manufacturers to beat you down with their check book and
> | lawyers, but often you have little (to none in your case) recourse at
> all.
> | All ya gotta do is tick off the wrong mogul, and in your case, they
> might
> | well turn you in to the BATF, steal your drawings, make a modification
> or
> | two and bring the innovation out themselves while you watch the news
> from
> | jail.
>
> The sad thing is a lot of people want more government intrusion into their
> lives.
>
Reasonable regulations and intrusion are two entirely different things. What
Paul's talking about is what inventors and innovators have faced for
decades... not just regulations, but the deep pockets and herds of lawyers
lined up against 'em in whatever industry they're aiming at.
That his particular idea apparently deals with firearms, and the debate
there still rages with mothers, lovers and fools on all sides, it remains
beside the point of the greater issue... i.e. that it's entirely too
difficult to bring a new idea to market and way too easy to steal it from
you.
Are you aware, for example, that you do not necessarily own your own DNA?
Woefully outdated laws pretty much allow a doc to patent DNA from tissue
samples he's taken from you in whatever test was performed. From that point
on, he owns a little piece of you. And, you'll play hell cashing in on any
of the income from what amounts to a byproduct of whatever he did, or did
not do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
