How many of these are patents that were granted and have not expired and are active in multiple countries and that you intend to maintain? That must be costly. One assumes you have thought of a way to recoup that cost? You can link to granted patents at some benefit, if you desire cooperation, and no risk to you.
1 Like
Itâs often a mistake to file a patent for an idea that you have not yet tried out in practice.
Once you try an idea, it can easily turn out not to work at all, or require adjustments to your original idea. Also if it does work at all, you might immediately find a way to make it better and wish you had waited to file a patent. Inventors are often warned about the abysmal percentage of patents that ever generate any cash. Also, just filing a patent doesnât mean a patent will issue, and if a patent does issue, it can easily turn out to be a âjunk patentâ - by some accounts, that includes most patents.
I remember dreaming of a new type of snowboard for years. I thought it might revolutionize the sport. So I built a prototype (maybe ruined a perfectly good snowboard) and when I got off the lift I couldnât wait to see how great it worked.
âOK here goes!â I said to myself.
But then I noticed it wasnât working very well.
I was barely able to get it down the hill.
It was definitely not an improvement.
I never quite figured out why it sucked so bad.
Perhaps some version of the basic idea could still work.
But I didnât feel like wasting any more time trying to find out.
The idea sucked as it was, and I was glad I didnât get so excited as to have filed a patent before trying it! 
1 Like
Would have been fun to see your snowboard idea. I also had an idea for an electric skateboard. I could consider patenting at a much later stage, if I ever made any progress first.
Patents are in my experience mostly a waste of time and focus. DHH says most startups worry too much about the things that are not going to be problems. I think patents is something any startup in AWE should take care to not overfocus on.
Once we are in a mature market with competing companies making money, patents will have [would have had] their place.
AWE is a field in which a multitude of patents have been filed and even issued, with no commercial follow-up except for @Kitewinder.
Startups feel compelled to file to satisfy investors, even for elements that are not in their main focus. Yet, it would be enough to keep the secret. Itâs not that hard and thatâs actually what some startups do or did, for example Makani for some time (although in addition to fill patent applications). It will always be possible to file a must-have patent for a decisive improvement when the project will be sufficiently advanced, and when placing on the market.
@tallakt
because so far noone figured out a good way to do AWE and proved it. Only then would copycats come into play
@tallakt
Note I have no reason to think Dave or John acting as a proxy has any sensible answers to any of this, makes me wonder why it is so important to have access to this forum
JAL has indeed figured out a good way to do AWE and proved it.
Here is some JAL âvirtual flyoffâ video data, longer than two seconds, showing high power that can be roughly calculated based on the videogrammetric clues of lifting several tons of wet sand by measurable time and distance-
Mothra has been well discussed.
John, I think wind generators work by using wind power in a more or less continuous way, not by lifting sand. Perhaps power-take-off (PTO) could be achieved by putting generators in the two ends, using pulling of the arch going up and down alternately, in a sort of yo-yo mode. Now several means to face wind changes has been discussed.
Your comments other than being ignored, of necessity, take us off the core of this topic. Furthermore, IP and patents are matters of "first recognition ", so we are yet on-topic.
The old AWES forum on YahooGroups remains in public archives. Those who love Truth appreciate records. Historically, palaces are the custodians of memorable archives. It is a terrible thing to be a false witness. If you witness for Doug who is present and speaking himself; may I not witness for Dave who is not able to speak for himself here now?
I have provided archival records of the first mention of "AWES Fly-Offâ and challenged Doug to prove his assertion in the face of the provable record I provided.
Thanks. I am new here. Mothra is from JAL. It works and is foundational to AKN.
The Open-AWE IP Pool is Real (~50 patents)
Inbox
|### dave santos|18 Aug 2022, 20:49 (14 hours ago)||
|
| â | â | â |
|to Tallak, Thomas, Kristian, Weber, Roland, Lorenzo, Hallissy, Smith, me, Melinda, Christopher, Joe
|
Tallak is forgiven for being unaware that in 2007, in response to the threat that GoogleX-Makani might develop enough IP to âown the skyâ, the Open-AWE Community assiduously amassed enough small AWE inventors to counter them. We secured email provisional agreements for around ~50 patents, many by amazing minds like Bolonkin and Olsen, and others not so great, but quite a âwar chestâ overall. We also amassed other forms of IP, like brands and copyrights, and CC IP. âJalbert Aerology Labâ for example, as a lapsed TM. but with Jalbert Family blessing.
The Advanced Kite Network Provisional Patent is intended to be a âsuperpatentâ with Dr Rutman guiding it (Rutman IP). This patent also counters the notion that our circle cannot do a patent for some imagined lack of petty mojo. The crux of this patent is a many-connected AWES topology aloft, multi-anchored, multi-PTO, as the ultimate scaling principle.
First Thomas and now Tallak have taken a pass on the AWE IP Pool, with Tallak (below) even doubting there is anything there. Jaap-Jan might disagree after due-diligence review Thomas and Tallak seem disinclined toward. Kristian is also offered for AWEurope to take a stake in an IP Pool. TUDelft as well, but Roland has not indicated interest.
Now that GoogleX has exited in failure, as predicted, there is no longer a panic to offset them, and the Pool may simply become assigned to the public domain, since our main goal is the actual hands-on R&D, not commercial management.
This email, of course, is the substitute for not being allowed to post to the New Forum. In answer to Tallak âwonder(ing) why it is so important to have access to this forumâ, itâs simply a matter of opposing technical censorship as a moral and engineering priority, given the Climate Endgame crisis, not about social media gratification. It is not acceptable for our Forums to willfully lack open information, to cheat the readers who want to know everything possible about AWE.
This information should be allowed to be posted to the Forum. JohnO is being attacked by AWEurope operatives for trying to inform the public record, as Tallakâs ongoing objections like this latest one reflect-
tallaktSoftware Engineer at Kitemill
1
PierreB:
John (unless you prefer I write âDaveâ), your own topic is AN INVITATION TO Open-AWE IP POOL . I donât see a lot comments relative to the topic.
I did post an on topic comment about the necessity of patents, though it was ignored if I am not mistaken.
We still donât know if there are actual patents involved here or just something different.
As if most companies would be interested in a patent for something so unique like AKN. Google patents is full of such stuff, though rarely raises an eyebrow.
Concrete stuff could matter though, eg Makani patenting putting a tension sensor on the tether. Once itâs that concrete and no way to work around it, someone may be interested. I donât think a lot such patents exist though, because so far noone figured out a good way to do AWE and proved it. Only then would copycats come into play
Note I have no reason to think Dave or John acting as a proxy has any sensible answers to any of this, makes me wonder why it is so important to have access to this forum
But you quoted themâŚ
Unfortunately for you, the truth is not in your side.
Huge claims as usual.
The details please.
@Windy_Skies
The Open-AWE IP-Pool does include many standing patents, some pending patents, and is open for future patents. We long have publicly intended to value peer IP generously, even lapsed patents, under an Honor System. We are not limited by the letter-of-the-law to do the right thing. The Open-AWE IP-Pool would eventually even seek to compensate the family estates of key inventors like Payne.
Thanks for requesting.
Do feel free to contact DaveS.
Regards.
OK guys, if you think you stopped someone from posting here, guess again - I recognize his typical writing style. He is posting here.
And what you can see is the typical resulting mess: A huge argument about absolutely nothing except ignorance and threats of taking over the entire field of AWE. Here he is, trying to sell you âterritoriesâ.
Yes the old DS/DS stuff was absurd.
At least I stood my ground.
Today the lies go on.
Iâm not getting involved anymore at this point. You guys are on your own.
Best strategy is to ignore people who make no sense.
So funny! So predictable! I KNEW you (daveS) would be coming in with that one next.
Itâs like an uncontrollable spasm - he just canât help himself saying the same old things over and over. Imagine any other group, claiming to have an AWE system that is supposed to specifically demonstrate a means of extracting power from a kite, showing a kite with NO WAY to extract power. AWE is Airborne Wind - then ENERGY. Maybe we should call it AWEG - airborne wind electricity generation! He hasnât included the E. He is just flying a kite. Using sand on a beach to hold their kite down is just normal practice for anyone flying kites on a beach. Of course if you launch a large kite with sand still on it, it will dump the sand off as it clears the ground. So what? this guy wants a medal because his kite has some lift??? The ENTIRE POINT of AWE has always been seeing the obvious power a kite has, and SHOWING A WAY TO GENERATE ELECTRICITY. That is the E of AWE. If you donât have any E, you donât have any AWE. He wants a grade of A, but he earned an âincompleteâ. Nothing to see here folks. Anytime anyone launches a kite, weighed down with sand, from a beach, the kite will dump the sand off as it takes off. It means nothing except it confirms what everyone has always known - back to the original starting place of âa kite can pullâ. This is worse than âthe guy who shows up at a Formula-One Race with a wheelbarrowâ - this is a guy rolling a tire down a hill, telling you he just won the Indy-500!
âLOOK! See how fast that tire rolled down the hill? Weâre the next auto racing world champions!â Wow, a breakthrough - he showed that a tire can roll down a hill!
1 Like
Not so, @dougselsam . I am the one here Not DaveS.
You are the accuser and you are equally playing judge. That to me is not fair. You are yet to show proof records of your allegations. I provided some from the archives to buttress mine. Human memory is short. We have the benefit of archived facts to help settle matters. I certainly was an owner/administrator of the old forum alongside JoeF until I took my leave then. All you are repeating here are simply well-worn unsubstantiated accusations of yours against DaveS and the old AWES forum.
As we always tell know-nothing-newbies in wind energy: Show us a power curve or some output on meter(s). The know-nothing newbies then try to change the subject and blame their audience for their own lack of results. What is new here is someone remaining a know-nothing-newbie for 14 years and counting.
Hi John (Dave), the extract I quote above comes from one of your comments. It could take place in Kite Networks - #8 by kitefreak or for a new topic about some specialization in the field of kite networking. This quoted content is also related to both AN INVITATION TO Open-AWE IP POOL (the current topic) and Advanced Kite Networks. In my opinion this is one of the strong points from Dave Santos, other potentially strong points being perhaps multi-anchor systems.
Indeed âTrain x Arch scaling define a maximal crosswind harvesting planeâ could open some perspective for scaling beyond known limits.
But great principles, although useful to determine an AWE direction, are not enough for a proposal such you stated. What is missing, and I am not the only one who thinks so, is a clear and credible description of how electricity is produced. Also missing are videos or photos showing the electricity produced on scale models. There is a lack of clear presentation of the documents, AKN pdf in first. In short, you need to review your copy.
1 Like
⌠
"Indeed, surely Olivier was laughing at the scientific excellence of power estimation from a pure physics perspective, rather than the common notion that only electrical output is power. In fact, all sorts of kite apps will be direct mechanical power, like pumped-hydro, reverse osmosis, irrigation, dredging, and so on.
Doug overlooks how many times our circle has metered electrical output, including the world-first grid-tie AWE at Kitefarm 2012. Electrical power demonstration is somewhat proportional to funding, and we are cheap. Its rather odd Doug is so annoyed that we have cleverly conserve capital while maximizing learning by not going big too quick. GoogleX died by scaling too fast, after we warned them. Someday we will make Doug happy and put plenty of power on the meter for him, if only he was patient.
This old AWES demo drove a Seiko self-winding Quartz electric chronometer. Absolute electrical supply precision, a tiny power-plant with Seiko as an engineering partner. Doug was enraged, rather than laugh politely like Olivier."
Thanks, DaveS.
You can never scale too slow, right?
1 Like