Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : The Microcap Kitchen: Stocks 5¢ to $5 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rawnoc who wrote (92389)	12/2/2009 1:50:47 PM
From: 1Coffeehound	4 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 120415

JBII - Well, I've leave you to make your case. No need for me to post further. I think I've provided adequate proof of wherein the stupidity lies. I believe JBII is a scam. If you think it is an investment, good luck to you.

To: Rawnoc who wrote (92389)	12/2/2009 6:12:27 PM
From: Ted M	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 120415

That's interesting Rawnoc. Never thought much about it, but there does seem to be risk in having a patent. The risk with having the patent is that someone can use what you've revealed to come up with something similar and maybe get away with it. The risk in not having a patent is that if someone can figure out what you've done you have no recourse. So, if the JBII process is not something that can be reverse engineered perhaps there is some wisdom in not patenting it. Since I've never really given it much thought, what do folks here think about the idea of NOT patenting something in order to PROTECT the idea?