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 : Microvision (MVIS) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Josef Svejk who wrote (2183)	3/29/1999 9:44:00 AM
From: Zeev Hed	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 7720

Josef, I am leaving for New York in an hour or two (Got to spend a day on the road for a 4 minutes interview on CNN <VBG>) and will not be able to get to this until later tomorrow night. Thanks in any event and thanks a lot for the kind words. Zeev

To: Josef Svejk who wrote (2183)	3/31/1999 9:46:00 AM
From: Zeev Hed	Read Replies (8) \| Respond to of 7720

Josef, I hope the quality of the rest of the work done at MVIS is better than the patent work, here is an example od sloppiness that may be costly in the future: (this is the first claim in one of their patents) 1. A virtual image display system comprising: a source of photons modulated with video information, said photons being scanned directly onto the retina of the user's eye to produce a virtual image perceived by the user without an aerial image outside of the user's eye perceivable by the user wherein said video information represents a plurality of picture elements of a video image and means for varying the focus of said scanned photons to control the depth perceived for each picture element of said video image. First, scanning the photons will not be very helpful, you have to direct the stream of photons on the retina. You also want to sequentially (in time) scan the stream (beam) of photons to different parts of the retina to create the image. Second, the claim as written is what we call "inoperative", it implies that a person having only one eye can perceive depth if you could just control the focus of the "scanned photons". Most people familiar with the art know that depth perception is created because two eyes view the same image from slightly different angles. You simply cannot create depth perception in a single eye. If someone hired me to invalidate this claim (and thus the patent, since this is the main independent claim) these two sentences would be all I would need to present. Very sloppy work. I looked at another patent and it was even worse. Gosh, if this technology has the potential it has (and I think it does) they'd better strengthen their IP group, because a competitor would laugh at this kind of a claim as a potential barrier to entry. Zeev