Brilliant Light Power Going To Market - Free Energy Generator

[michaelsuede]

Still gonna need that US patent if you want USA patent protection AND until that is done there is no USA patent protection. Sell them in Canada all you want, not much stopping someone from producing and selling them in the USA and not paying Mills a cent UNTIL he has that patent.

Not really.

No one with the capital to setup a production operation that creates copies of Mills units would be willing to risk Mills eventually winning his lawsuit and getting a back-dated patent.

At which point, Mills could sue them for everything.

Once a patent is on file with the WIPO, it's almost as if you have full legal protection in every member state.

They would have to gamble that:

1. The US Patent Office would refuse to issue a patent for a fully working device that already has patents on file in member states.
2. That a US judge would rule against Mills in a new patent suit, where he has a fully working unit to support his case.

I find both of these scenarios to be unlikely, and I'd wager that anyone with the capital to build a production facility would also find them to be highly unlikely.

 

[hecd2]

If the US still refuses to grant a patent, Mills can again take them to court. There's no way a judge is going to deny a patent application on a fully functional device that already has standing patents on file with member states.

a patent is not grant on functionality but on novelty, and a disclosed specification that allows one skilled in the art to replicate the claims. So assuming that there is a mechanism or process and that mechanism or process has novelty, and that the mechanism is described in such a way that it can be replicated by one skilled in the art, then a patent should be granted. That doesn't depend in the slightest on a commercialised product, but might, in this case, rely on a demonstration of new physics.

 

[halleyscomet]

Still gonna need that US patent if you want USA patent protection AND until that is done there is no USA patent protection. Sell them in Canada all you want, not much stopping someone from producing and selling them in the USA and not paying Mills a cent UNTIL he has that patent.

Even worse, the device being sold by others can PREVENT him from getting a patent.

I'm telling you, if it's not a scam, Bright Light Power is run by morons. If the investors don't lose their money to a con job, they'll lose it to incompetent handling of patents, monetization of the technology and just about everything else.

You'd think someone with a world-changing invention and 60 million in investment funds would have hired ONE patent attorney by now.

 

[gerdbonk]

It's not.

In order to invest in BrLP you have to be an accredited investor.

Any non-publicly traded corporation requires you to be an accredited investor before you can invest.

Thus, your average idiot can only invest in publicly traded corporations.

Stop BSing.

That phrase is the epitome of deception: "it's an exclusive club", "membership has its privileges".

Actually, Accredited Investor is a defined term through the SEC.

Unlike offerings registered with the SEC in which certain information is required to be disclosed, companies and private funds, such as a hedge fund or venture capital fund, engaging in these exempt offerings do not have to make prescribed disclosures to accredited investors. These offerings, sometimes referred to as private placements, involve unique risks and you should be aware that you could lose your entire investment.

An Accredited Investor basically has to have money to lose.

 

[Aepervius]

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/foreign-patents-patent-treaties.html

If the US is too pigheaded to grant me a patent, I can simply go to another country where we have reciprocity treaties in place and get one granted there.

To quote Nolo, "when an inventor from Country A applies for a patent in Country B, the inventor will be treated in the same manner as inventors living in Country B. "

Once that is done, I can file a global patent with WIPO, which has standing virtually everywhere, including the US.

In fact, a search of the WIPO shows that's exactly what BrLP did. Most of their patents are either filed from Canada, Israel or directly with WIPO.

"I" ? "me" ? `That takes an interesting turn of phrase.

 

[Aepervius]

No one with the capital to setup a production operation that creates copies of Mills units would be willing to risk Mills eventually winning his lawsuit and getting a back-dated patent.

At which point, Mills could sue them for everything.

Good luck winning that fight before the foreign court.

Especially that most countries are "first to file" (as I understand it) which means that "chinese" copier could simply patent it there and any other country he is willing or can do, and there is diddly squat a first inventor could do.

 

[aleCcowaN]

Actually, Accredited Investor is a defined term through the SEC.



An Accredited Investor basically has to have money to lose.

They don't look so rich to me. One million dollar assets and an annual income of 200K is something hundreds of thousands have. The bank manager at the West Podunk branch of the Last National Bank can do.

There are plenty of stupid people among that group. Smooth talkers like michaelsuede can convince them to part with some tens of Ks.

The "membership has its privileges" potential still exist. Add to that some smooth talk about the dot coms and how some made it -in spite of the dot com collapse which has been forgotten- can get thousands behind this kind of con which can be a Ponzi-scheme but with R&D justifying why the money no longer is there. A "provider" making 11 mg probes of copper hydroxide and iron bromide and charging some 20 thou each would suffice to funnel the money of the "accredited investors" out of the company..

 

[halleyscomet]

In order to invest in BrLP you have to be an accredited investor.

In the USA that means they could walk away with the pension plan funds for any medium to large company. It also means they could clean out many small businesses. It's not the "only the rich get fleeced" protection you seem to be implying.

Take a look at the extensive list of what qualifies as an "accredited investor" in the USA:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accredited_investor

Hey, look at that. A lot of pension funds count as "accredited investors" in the USA.

Most large charities and a lot of churches count as "accredited investors." I wonder if that played a role in the MMS guys making monkeys out of the ELCA a few years ago.

Have you thought of adding a religious spin? I'm sure Ken Ham can be counted on for a few million if you can convince him this is somehow "for Jesus."

Check this out:

a natural person who has individual net worth, or joint net worth with the person's spouse, that exceeds $1 million at the time of the purchase, or has assets under management of $1 million or above, excluding the value of the individual's primary residence;

You know who that includes? Farmers. A woman I dated in college was the daughter of a dairy farmer. She was cut out of all sorts of financial aid programs because, on paper, her dairy farmer father was worth a few million dollars. That was because the potential sale value of his land was included in the calculation. He counts as an accredited investor though.

 

[phunk]

I totally forget the details, but neutrons, protons and electrons, iirc, are all "made of" (in quotes because that is not quite the right phrase, but easy to understand) various quarks and neutrinos.

Protons and neutrons (and their anti-particles) are made up of quarks, but electrons are fundamental particles.

 

[halleyscomet]

I've already got a basic plot outline as well as a brief disclaimer.

Disclaimer: this is a work of fiction. Any similarity to persons living or dead is purely coincidental. The effects of hydrinos on living organisms such as humans described in this book are theoretical extrapolations. In reality, nothing is known about hydrino chemistry and biochemistry as, Brilliant Light Power, the only company known to have produced hydrinos, have not published any research into their safety, nor have they released samples of hydrino gas to researchers.

But Brilliant Light Power assures hydrino gas is safe, and they want to vent it into the atmosphere.

Without EPA oversight.

Chemically hydrinos are going to be pretty wild things. The extent of just how wild will depend upon the outer electron shell. There's also the risk of the inner electron spontaneously returning to a zero state. That could have rather unpleasant effects on the human body a few hours after someone has drunk hydrino based water. Imagine water in your blood spontaneously decomposing into hydrogen and oxygen. It'd combine the bends, electrical discharge, gas expansion damage and a host of other problems.

On the bright side, the oxygen will be absorbed by the surviving tissue in a "free radical damage" sort of way.

 

[tableplay]

I'm guessing that is the reason it got posted here in the first place - to get the kinks out of the grift.

This would be a good place to hone your pitch. Work the bugs out before that presentation to Mr. Trump.

 

[tableplay]

I'm going with tritinos (tritium in a lower state than the base state of tritium) being found to be waay more better than hydrinos, but new shielding will need to be designed since tritium is much more toxic than hydrogen.

Perhaps the most useful and entertaining direction for this thread would be to predict what the next excuse will be when Blacklight/Brilliant Light Power fails to meet their most current promised deadline. That they successfully designed and manufactured the promised solar cells but that in doing so they discovered a modification that would allow them to triple their efficiency, causing the company to put off production until the redesigned cells could be incorporated? A modification in the geometry of the reactor that would allow it to fit within a thimble, with commercialization being delayed until this compact device can be sent off for large scale production? Or perhaps just a small glitch in a supply chain, or the concept that the hydrinos produced cause corrosion that forces a redesign, or even that the company has decided to focus on larger scale devices for the power grid after all, and forcing a delay in the actual distribution of these devices.

Ideas?

 

[hecd2]

Once a patent is on file with the WIPO, it's almost as if you have full legal protection in every member state.

They would have to gamble that:

1. The US Patent Office would refuse to issue a patent for a fully working device that already has patents on file in member states.
2. That a US judge would rule against Mills in a new patent suit, where he has a fully working unit to support his case.

Nonsense.

First of all, if you file via PCT then you have 18 months to file in as many national jursidictions as you wish to in order to get the priority date of the first filing in those states. At most this gives you 30 months maximum breathing space before having to go national (assuming you file in a single jurisdiction, say Canada, to get a priority date, and then file PCT a maximum of 12 months after that - you must file national appliactions within 18 months of the the PCT application). PCT does not give you any protection per se - and it does not ensure your priority date beyond 18 months of the PCT filing date. Insofar as you do not file in any state beyond the 18 month deadline, then you are deemed to have abandoned the application in those states and the invention, having been disclosed by virtue of the patent application, becomes free to use in those states. Only national patents provide protection. You have no proection in any sate in which you do not have a granted national patent, irrespective of whether you have gone PCT.

Secondly, the idea that a granted patent in one jurisdiction will guarantee the granting of the same patent in another jurisdiction is fantasy. An examiner in any jurisdiction, say the US, has no requirement to accept, or even consider, the examiner's decision in another national jurisdiction. It is common for patents granted in one jurisdiction to be granted in another jurisdiction with a different set of claims, or to be rejected entirely. This is necessarily so, since patent law is not the same across states, and because the patent's validity ceases at the borders of the state.

Third, the functionality of any existing device is irrelevant to the examination of an application in the US and most states. A functional device could exit based on a non-patentable principle, and a there is no requirement to demonstrate a functionla device to have a patent granted. What is relevant is whether the claims of the patent are novel, have not been publicly disclosed prior to the priority date (good luck with that in this case), and whether the patent specification would allow one skilled in the art to replicate the invention.

 

[gerdbonk]

They don't look so rich to me. One million dollar assets and an annual income of 200K is something hundreds of thousands have. The bank manager at the West Podunk branch of the Last National Bank can do.

There are plenty of stupid people among that group. Smooth talkers like michaelsuede can convince them to part with some tens of Ks.

The "membership has its privileges" potential still exist. Add to that some smooth talk about the dot coms and how some made it -in spite of the dot com collapse which has been forgotten- can get thousands behind this kind of con which can be a Ponzi-scheme but with R&D justifying why the money no longer is there. A "provider" making 11 mg probes of copper hydroxide and iron bromide and charging some 20 thou each would suffice to funnel the money of the "accredited investors" out of the company..

I don't disagree, however "privilege" is not the reason for the creation of the designation. A company can file to be exempt from certain SEC regulations (such as information disclosure) -- earning this exemption limits them to selling securities to Accredited Investors. Qualifying as an Accredited Investor means you are looking to invest in unique, high risk ventures (including small businesses, so vast sums is not the requirement really -- it's the capacity to absorb 100% loss).

Ready-made for the con game? You betcha. However, also prevents a non-accredited investor, perhaps a novice betting their life savings, from losing everything, whether to a fraud or to a legitimate venture that goes bust for any reason. You might note this rule was implemented during the Depression.

ETA: It's really not something to brag about. It's not uncommon. It's merely that both the company and the investor are following a particular set of rules set up by the SEC.

 

[tableplay]

This guy must have an expensive lifestyle - I would have stopped at 5M.

He then fleeces them for all he can, which as of the last reports I heard, was $60,000,000.

 

[tableplay]

Yes no doubt that Horatius doesn't want cheap abundant energy for the world and he is trying to stop it. He would prefer paying the current relatively expensive energy prices for various things.

I think it's more because you don't want any challenges to standing theory actually making it into the market.

 

[michaelsuede]

Nonsense.

First of all, if you file via PCT then you have 18 months to file in as many national jursidictions as you wish to in order to get the priority date of the first filing in those states. At most this gives you 30 months maximum breathing space before having to go national (assuming you file in a single jurisdiction, say Canada, to get a priority date, and then file PCT a maximum of 12 months after that - you must file national appliactions within 18 months of the the PCT application). PCT does not give you any protection per se - and it does not ensure your priority date beyond 18 months of the PCT filing date. Insofar as you do not file in any state beyond the 18 month deadline, then you are deemed to have abandoned the application in those states and the invention, having been disclosed by virtue of the patent application, becomes free to use in those states. Only national patents provide protection. You have no proection in any sate in which you do not have a granted national patent, irrespective of whether you have gone PCT.

Secondly, the idea that a granted patent in one jurisdiction will guarantee the granting of the same patent in another jurisdiction is fantasy. An examiner in any jurisdiction, say the US, has no requirement to accept, or even consider, the examiner's decision in another national jurisdiction. It is common for patents granted in one jurisdiction to be granted in another jurisdiction with a different set of claims, or to be rejected entirely. This is necessarily so, since patent law is not the same across states, and because the patent's validity ceases at the borders of the state.

Third, the functionality of any existing device is irrelevant to the examination of an application in the US and most states. A functional device could exit based on a non-patentable principle, and a there is no requirement to demonstrate a functionla device to have a patent granted. What is relevant is whether the claims of the patent are novel, have not been publicly disclosed prior to the priority date (good luck with that in this case), and whether the patent specification would allow one skilled in the art to replicate the invention.

I love how you just throw out the word "nonsense" as if I'm factually wrong in my statement.

Let's quote patent law:

"A rejection on the ground of lack of utility is appropriate when (1) it is not apparent why the invention is “useful” because applicant has failed to identify any specific and substantial utility and there is no well established utility, or (2) an assertion of specific and substantial utility for the invention is not credible. Such a rejection can include the more specific grounds of inoperativeness, such as inventions involving perpetual motion. "

ergo, if you can demonstrate operativeness, there is no grounds for dismissal. Thus having an operative machine enables Mills to have grounds to sue should the USPO again reject his application for being a perpetual motion machine.

As for the timeline, I'm betting a 100 he makes the deadlines just fine.

 

[Beanbag]

This BLP/Mills thing has a certain, familiar, old smell to it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ernst_Worrell_Keely

Similar playbook: unique invention, gets backers, makes a few demonstrations, then doesn't market what they've got because they've discovered A Better Version. Lather, rinse, repeat for some 26-odd years.

Almost enough to make me consider the possibility of reincarnation.

Beanbag

 

[tableplay]

Are you saying that accredited investors are exceptional idiots ?

It's not.

In order to invest in BrLP you have to be an accredited investor.

Any non-publicly traded corporation requires you to be an accredited investor before you can invest.

Thus, your average idiot can only invest in publicly traded corporations.

 

[jaydeehess]

Mills has standing in Canada, Israel and with the WIPO. He can go to market in any of those countries. At that point he will have a demonstrable product and can demand legal protection from any participating member state.

Let's go back to NOLO.

"Most industrialized countries are also members of the PCT, a treaty that enables inventors to file a relatively economical international application in their home country within one year of their home country filing date. "

But it doesn't stop there.

"There are two advantages in filing a PCT application: the inventor obtains a filing date that is good in every member country in which the inventor seeks patent protection; and an initial international patent search will be conducted and PCT member countries will rely heavily on this search."

So because Mills has standing in a member state and has international applications on file, he can go back to the US office with a working device and get a patent that's back-dated to the time of filing with the PCT.

If the US still refuses to grant a patent, Mills can again take them to court. There's no way a judge is going to deny a patent application on a fully functional device that already has standing patents on file with member states.

Now technically you are correct that there is no such thing as a valid WIPO patent, but his CA, IL and WO patents on file with the WIPO are essentially just that - they give him the right to back date his patents practically everywhere.

My original statement still stands. First you get a patent filed in a member state, then you file with WIPO.

..The inventor in a PCT nation must eventually file separate “national” applications in each country or group of countries (such as the EPO) where the inventor wants coverage,

Still gonna need that US patent if you want USA patent protection AND until that is done the6rr is no USA patent protection. Sell them in Canada all you want, not much stopping someone from producing and selling them in the USA and not paying Mills a cent UNTIL he has that patent.