DougS - What?
I'm not going to answer the silly conjecture that another company could steal and apply what we've done in the future.
You already did!
You asked what would be the basis of a patent battle. When you found out it was based on the 'silly conjecture' you responded with an uninformed premise.
Now that you have received further clarification that obliviates your premise, you, now devoid of argument, dismiss it as silly. Exellent debating tactic.
The 'reality' outlined by philipabel's son is the current state of the industry. It may not be what you would like it to be but that is unfortunately irrelevant. I also work in the biomedical field and I have three patents granted so far as well as three more in the process. We spend a good portion of our effort researching our competitors patents and devising ways to circumvent them. It is the nature of the business, right or wrong.
If you think that no one can duplicate the Doctors work once the patent has been issed you are sorely mistaken. If the work cannot be duplicated based on the patent it will not be approved. Consider that the patent reviewer MUST understand it, and KNOW how to duplicate the invention or else he cannot judge it's value or it's patentability.
Furthermore, I DID NOT suggest that it is probable that another company WILL steal DNAP's technology, just that they could if they wished, and how I chose to evaluate my stockholdings to determine when I will buy or sell is not subject to your approval.
I am curious to see if this post will be censored as others in the thread have been. Even though it is ON topic, it does not echo the sentiment of this board.
regards,
frog
