permaculture

[dwoodard@becon.org]

That may be the way it is supposed to be, and I'm sure it's way it ought
to be, but it doesn't seem to be the way that it actually works.

To be more precise, the type of disclosure that is now accepted seems to
be distinguishing the invention from what is not covered under the patent,
so that the patent holder can sure those infringing it, with as little
attention as possible to describing how it works or how someone else might
reproduce it.

Doug Woodard
St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada



Dieter Brand wrote:
>
> According to the clarity requirement, an invention needs to be described
> clear1y and without ambiguity so that a person skilled in the art can
> carry it out.
>
> You can only get a patent for what is disclosed, not for what is not
> disclosed.
>
> Dieter