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 : Fonar - Where is it going? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SpinShooter who wrote (10707)	8/6/1998 5:14:00 AM
From: BBurrows	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 19354

You are really very ignorant. <<Raymond Damadian, made a lot of news ... including one article in the Wall Street Journal. It was about inventors who had learned best how to use the "system" for US Patents, etc.>> You have been repeatedly blown out of the water for your sick, demented suggestions that GE was never involved in patent infringement, repeatedly proven wrong and have the NERVE to show up again on this thread with a suggestion that Dr. D has milked the 'system' for profit with bogus patent infringement lawsuits?! Why don't you post the link to the article and provide some real facts (which you cannot do). You have absolutely ZERO credibility left! Take a HINT and GO AWAY!!!

To: SpinShooter who wrote (10707)	8/6/1998 7:40:00 AM
From: FRANK ROSSI	Respond to of 19354

HI SPIN, Let's do it ONE MORE TIME. Dr.D. invented MAO not GE . GE put MAO in 600 [at least] of their machines WITHOUT PERMISSION OR PAYMENT. This is called patent infringement or stealing . Which ever you wish to call it . Results , PAY UP. SiMPLE . END OF STORY. YOUR THOUGHTS FRANK

To: SpinShooter who wrote (10707)	8/6/1998 9:10:00 AM
From: Glenn Olsen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 19354

SpinShooter His son seems to live in the same town. Couldn't find the book listed in the local libraries and Amazon.com has his last name as Mollis. So much for fame. If one of the largest awards in history doesn't qualify Dr. D as a successful "user" of the system, what does it take? Others have had their efforts taken and exploited by companies and achieved nothing like the compensation Dr. D got. Were they less deserving or just less skillful in "using" the system? GE and others have used the system to their ends. Their loss unfortunately does not mean the system is now "good", just that the system can go either way. Just the "gored ox" theory at work. Glenn

To: SpinShooter who wrote (10707)	8/6/1998 10:19:00 AM
From: Michelino	Respond to of 19354

Spinshooter, Perhaps you missed some of my posts, but about your claim that Fonar action against GE "was NOT a Patent Court suit". ...It seems that the Official US Patent and Trademark office has no record of any "Patent Court" system in this country. Message 5416028 So where can we find this "Patent Court" of your? And among other earlier statements there was this from you: "The Appeals Court found for FONAR, and said a Trial Judge in a civil suit cannot set aside a jury award. It was never about "first patent", or who "invented a technique". It was about Jury decisions, and if a trial judge can dismiss jury award" I provided several links, including the text of the original decision itself that conflicts with your claim: Message 5413244 How do you resolve the conflict between your version and the US Circuit court's version? I'm having trouble finding the WSJ article to which you refer in: "It was about inventors who had learned best how to use the "system" for US Patents, etc. " Can you provide a more concrete reference here? Regards, Michael

To: SpinShooter who wrote (10707)	8/6/1998 8:04:00 PM
From: Zeev Hed	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 19354

Spinshooter, how about some facts, there is no Lemulsky, there was a star inventor Lemelson, who has made fortunes on patents (and at his death donated the great majority of these fortunes to a Chair in MIT, if memory serves), not by learning how to handle the system, but by being creative and inventive. Read our constitution, you'll find out something about the reasons the patent "system" is in place. If you follow what is going on in the "intellectual property arena", you will find that big business, including GE, GM and few others have put tremendous pressure on Congress to change our system to make it almost impossible for inventors to reap the rewards of their work. Inventors are fighting back, however, and so far have managed to block the "first to file" (rather than "first to invent") drive big business was trying to get written into law. As for Damadian, he may not be a great business manager, but he is a king in the world of innovation and invention. Pick the Dec/Jan 1998 issue of Investor Digest and you may learn a little. It will make you a better commentator on these matters. Last, as far as GE is concerned, they loathe innovation, their motto relative to inventions and inventors is "Who wants to be a pioneer? Pioneers have arrows in their backs". Zeev