good list of geoengineering patents?

[Fred Zimmerman]

has anyone got a good list of major geoengineering patents?

---

Fred Zimmerman

Geoengineering IT!   

Bringing together the worlds of geoengineering and information technology

GE NewsFilter: http://geoengineeringIT.net:8080 

[Chris Vivian]

Fred,

 

This list of patents was referred to by Clive Hamilton. I don't know how good it is.

 

http://rezn8d.net/2013/04/14/climate-engineering-patents/ 

 

Chris.

[Jim Lee]

I made that list, and I must warn you, the geoengineering section at the top of the page is far from finished.  Further, the weather modification/particle distribution patents at the bottom of the page only cover 1900-2003.

I will be repackaging all of my weather modification research in the near future and intend to finish this list for that project.  If anyone would like to ensure your patents appear in the list, post a link in this thread or email me j...@climateviewer.com

For now, you can see the main page here: http://terraforminginc.com/climate-engineering-exposed/index.html which links to my blog posts on geoengineering.

Jim Lee

http://terraforminginc.com/

[Mick West]

It's not good at all. It does contain quite a few geoengineering patents, but it also contains a load of patents for speculative or unrelated things influenced by the "chemtrail" and "HAARP is a super weapon" conspiracy theories. 

Unfortunately any search for "geoengineering patents" brings up a slew of similar lists. 

Mick West

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to geoengineerin...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to geoengi...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

[Fred Zimmerman]

Yes, it is a bad list. So far it appears that there is no scientifically credible "list" and that this is a gap.

There are also definitional issues:should we call something a "geoengineering" patent if it is for a device that could be used either at local or at global scales?  Should the term "geoengineering patent" be reserved for large-scale methods?

---

Fred Zimmerman

Geoengineering IT!   

Bringing together the worlds of geoengineering and information technology

GE NewsFilter: http://geoengineeringIT.net:8080 

[eugg...@comcast.net]

Most of the patents are out of date and/or US patents. All will be out of date by the time anyone is ready to geoengineer the climate. US patents alone won't cut it since solutions will cross boundaries. Geoengineers should focus on science and solutions and not look to get rich on their inventions except in a prestige sense. Why anyone would want to patent geoengineering solutions except for prestige is beyond me. Good publications would be much more important.

---

From: "Chris Vivian" <Chris....@cefas.co.uk>
To: geoengi...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 10:10:36 AM
Subject: [geo] Re: good list of geoengineering patents?

--

[Jim Lee]

Mick West's comments are heavily biased on the assumption that I attribute my research to the "chemtrail conspiracy" when in fact my intention is to elevate the Grade School level internet discussion regarding contrails.

If you take more than five minutes to read the links in my "chemtrail" timeline, you will quickly realize that the effects of aviation produced contrail cirrus are still unknown after 40+ years of flight, and the military repeatedly discusses using contrail cirrus for weather modification and defense from satellites.  The timeline contains facts, not conspiracy.  Mick West has reviewed this timeline, and not offered one correction/addition.

The patent list shows the top-level weather modification/geoengineering/particle distribution by plane patents, AND all "US. Patent References" associated with that patent.  Rest assured, if it is in the list, it is related to climate alteration.

Read the list, judge for yourself, and send me any corrections/additions that need to be in version 2.  

Jim Lee

terraforminginc.com

~ "A debunk can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ... Jim Lee

[Fred Zimmerman]

Just to clarify  reason for asking about patents:

I agree with most of what Gene says below. Patent law has become an embarrassment and serves mainly as a mechanism for trolls to exact unearned taxes from those who are doing useful things. 

However, the body of patent law on a topic is a necessary legal reference point for those who are actually building useful enterprises.  

Also, as a post a few weeks ago mentioned, IP law about GE may assume heightened significance in the absence of a coherent governance regime.

I appreciate Jim Lee's efforts to create a reasonabl(ish) list as a starting point and thank him forsharing it with the list.

Andrew Lockley asked a few weeks ago "where do we need to spend money" -- maybe one answer is that a competent and neutral(ish) body needs to commission a survey or registry of IP related to GE.

[eugg...@comcast.net]

Fred; Thanks for the agreement. I am not sure with what you don't agree. 

Anyway all should know that patents worldwide are granted to those first to file and not to those first to invent. A prior mention of an invention or an idea related to an invention in the public domain generally prevents issuance of a related patent filed after the probable, prior mention. Hence a publication, talk or other provable mention of an idea ruins the opportunity to get a patent on the idea. In other words a publication or something mentioned in the geoengineering e-mail is a patent killer. Patenting in geoengineering represent an expense that is probably unnecessary. Patents are tough to get issued unless one is secretive about the idea until the patent is filed. The cost of a worldwide patents on an invention probably runs to $50,000 unless one does the writing. Bell Labs paid the bill. Now I do the writing for my inventions and filing a provisional patent costs about $500 and then one has upwards of a year to start filing full patents worldwide. Developing the technology to carry ou a geoengineering experiment to prove in the patent could cost $millions. Who is going to invest? Hence, a patent is unlikely to pay off to the inventor. Better to publish and get the appreciation of ones colleagues and self satisfaction.

-gene

---

From: "Fred Zimmerman" <geoengin...@gmail.com>
To: "Gene Gordon" <eugg...@comcast.net>
Cc: "Chris Vivian" <Chris....@cefas.co.uk>, "geoengineering" <geoengi...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 11:23:49 AM
Subject: Re: [geo] Re: good list of geoengineering patents?