Skip to comments.Patent Office Forces E-Cat Self-Destruct Capability
Posted on 06/08/2011 11:00:52 PM PDT by Kevmo
PESN associate Hank Mills, composed this for PESN.
To preserve intellectual property and trade secrets, Andrea Rossi is being forced to design a self destruct mechanism to be built into every E-Cat (Energy Catalyzer) used by the public. This could delay the public (non-industrial) launch of the technology.
Andrea Rossi's cold fusion E-Cat (Energy Catalyzer) technology is based on hard science, but is nothing short of a miracle. It provides a technology that could completely solve the world's energy crisis. The E-Cat consumes tiny amounts of cheap fuel (nickel and hydrogen), and produce huge amounts of energy for long periods of time. It does so without generating any pollution, radioactivity, or nuclear waste. However, the critical patents covering the technology and the protections for the proprietary "catalysts" used have not yet been granted. This has pressured Andrea Rossi into deciding the technology cannot be launched for use by individuals for home use, until he has designed a self destruct mechanism to be built into every unit.
The reason for including this self destruct mechanism is that if someone opened the reaction vessel of an E-Cat, they could obtain all the "secrets" in a short period of time. Without patent protection in the form of granted patents, this could give away key information to competitors, and potentially even invalidate patents that are still pending.
Here are a few of the comments Rossi has made about this issue on his blog, "The Journal of Nuclear Physics."
www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=4 ... ment-43618
Lande June 4th, 2011 at 2:00 PM
I understand that you can not discuss the details surrounding the catalyst.
But will you later be able to discuss this, or will this part forever be a company secret?
And is not the catalyst function important for the theoretical physics explanation behind it all?
www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=4 ... ment-43729
Andrea Rossi June 5th, 2011 at 12:14 AM
Dear Mr Lande: All depends on the granting of the patent. Warm Regards, A.R.
www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=4 ... ment-44045
Greg June 6th, 2011 at 3:29 PM
Dear Dr. Rossi,
thank you for your reply. You write you are being conservative regarding the sales of single modules. But if Defkalion/AmpEnergo plans to produce 300 000 units per year do you think you will be able to prevent just one of them ending up in China? In my opinion you will be very wealthy from the royalties from Europe/US, but the Chinese will hack the security features and produce their own. Or am I wrong on this assumption?
Kind regards, Greg
www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=4 ... ment-44064
Andrea Rossi June 6th, 2011 at 4:50 PM
Dear Greg: Defkalion, I suppose, will not sell modules until the protection issue [is] resolved. Warm regards, A.R.
www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=4 ... ment-44021
Greg June 6th, 2011 at 1:07 PM
Dear Dr. Rossi,
in my opinion, within one month the Chinese buy the first E-Cat they will reproduce it. They showed no respect for patents/intellectual property in the past. How will you prevent this from happening?
www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=4 ... ment-44038
Andrea Rossi June 6th, 2011 at 2:42 PM
Dear Greg: Good point. This is why we are very conservative regarding the sale of single modules. We are engineering a system that will destroy automatically the confidential parts if the reactor is open. The reactors will be open only in our factory to replace the charge. This is why we want not to replace the charges on site.
Warm regards, A.R.
www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=3 ... ment-43087
Alan C June 2nd, 2011 at 10:55 AM
Dear Mr Rossi,
You have said We have to resolve the problem to make them self-destructive in case of opening the reactors . Is this necessary if you have a patent? Is it possible to achieve this against someone with sophisticated tools and equipment? Wont your secret necessarily be in the public domain once the technology is widely distributed?
All the best with the project. I am checking in regularly and looking forward to your success in October.
Best regards from the UK Alan
www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=3 ... ment-43089
Andrea Rossi June 2nd, 2011 at 11:02 AM
Dear Mr Alan C.: 1- I have not yet an international patent granted, I have a National patent granted, the international application is still pending 2- It is difficult to make this self destruction technology, this is why it will take time. We must find a way that is not dangerous for the persons, but that annihilates instantaneously all the sensible information if somebody tries to open the sealed parts 3- I have to defend the People that have invested in this. And I will. Warm regards, A.R.
www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=3 ... ment-43028
Riccardo June 2nd, 2011 at 7:32 AM
Dear Mr Rossi, I read that there wont be any implementations in Italy soon. Are you talking about the industrial aspect? What about the private use of the E-Cat? Will it be available in Italy too?
www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=3 ... ment-43033
Andrea Rossi June 2nd, 2011 at 8:01 AM
Dear Mr Riccardo: I think that the household targeted items will arrive later. We have to resolve the problem to make them self-destructive in case of opening the reactors. Otherwise, with few thousands of dollars anybody has access to the confidential aspects of the technology. In industrial plants this issue is more easy to afford and has been resolved. Warm Regards, A.R.
Life Saving Technology Denied
From reading Andrea Rossi's comments, it seems the technology will not be released for use by individuals (use in homes) any time soon, unless the patents involved are granted. It is an absolute tragedy that due to the delays of the U.S. Patent Office (and their policy of not granting patents to "cold fusion" processes), the E-Cat may only see use in industrial settings for some time to come.
The Cold Fusion Ping List
This news is spreading through the blogosphere.
Sounds like he’s doin’ it right. I’ll gladly wait if china is kept out and if big business doesn’t get to monopolize it.
Sounds like the old hydride swindle to me.
A fellow used to sell a ‘magic engine’ that ‘used water as fuel’ and did demonstrations. He would open up his ‘fuel tank’ add water and sure enough, the engine would run.
hydrides would give off hydrogen when exposed to water. Of course hydride as fuel was much more expensive per btu than petroleum.
Hope I am wrong.
“Andrea Rossi is being forced to design a self destruct mechanism to be built into every E-Cat (Energy Catalyzer) used by the public. “
i freely admit, i don’t understand any of this. and, up till now, it sounded intriguing...
but that seriously activates my “BSoMeter”. maybe it’s legit, but it sure sound like a snake oil guy would sound.
...i know you wrote some good things on an unrelated post, so if you think it’s legit, i’ll try to keep an open mind.
Bullstuff. A 'master zeroize' device isn't going to change the elemental composition and relative ratios of 'catalysts'. Blow it up with C4 and a good mass spectrometrer guy can XOR out the C4 and tell you what, and how much.
This is the first time that I've been suspicious instead of curious. Disclosure, I'm just a cook.
Thanks for this information- although it sounds too good to be true!
I don’t buy that the patent office requires anything of the sort. Sounds like a BS excuse to explain the lack of an actual product/working model.
It’s possible he’s in the same position the Wright Brothers were. They knew they had a good first-generation solution, but they were surrounded by people who were trying to steal their knowledge and create their own airplanes. The Smithsonian institute teamed up with Curtiss Wright to do just that, in the ensuing patent battle.
Much of how the Wright Brothers acted before they had signed manufacturing contracts could have been seen as very suspicious. It would be even more suspicious today.
Filing of the application in every country I am familiar with secures your date of invention, and you are not barred from receiving patent protection by selling your product after the filing of your applications and before patent grant. Patent prosecution can be a very long process, and such a requirement would be hugely detrimental to the patent system and to the economy. I don’t know where this source is getting their legal information, but I can only hope that the physics behind the device are better than the legal advice driving its development.
Additionally, to get the patent he will have to disclose the information necessary to enable a person to practice his invention. So, he will have to disclose the sensitive features and functions. If he will not make this disclosure, he will not get the patent. The Chinese won’t need to buy one of his devices and reverse engineer it to figure out how it works, they will only have to get a copy of a granted patent, and these are easily found online. Once again, his legal advice seems to be very poor, and one can only hope that his knowledge of physics is better than his understanding of the patent system.
(read this in the voice of those bears that talk about “the bernank)...
It is a fact: commie rats copy off of other people rather than doing their own work.
I heard from an old computer hand that the soviet rats had completely reverse engineered IBM’s hardware in the early days of computing, then simply pirated the operating system by smuggling it out on tape. The remarkable thing was that the hardware was reverse engineered well enough to run the o/s.
They also like to steal things and make mischief.
The chinese are certainly trying to gain access to every server and piece of network equipment that is connected to the internet in the usa. Every time I start up a new server, within a few hours it is experiencing a brute force attack to break in which is originating from either a chinese or middle eastern or eastern european ip address. Brute force attacks only work on equipment where the administrator is stupid. Of couse, they are able to break into any such “stupidly” managaged server, so they have access to many servers in the usa.
Many Chinese also love to pirate software rather than write it themselves, no matter how cheap it is. The Chinese government seems to love this.
So it is wise to keep your technology or anything you own away from the Chinese, because they will try to steal it. Then you will have missed your opportunity to make money from the time you spend developing your idea. So why bother working on your idea; let the idiot thieves create their own technology. Only sell your work to someone who will pay you what you ask.
He uses two words and he means two things. Obviously he's not going to be able to destroy the hydrogen, nickel and lithium, but he can slag out the chip and the switches with a swish of acid contained in a packet that breaks when you pull the housing apart. His secret is the "operating temperature", not the materials this thing is made out of.