A440A@AOL.COM wrote: > Terry writes: > > << My point was that action geometry is not a > > component of Stanwood's patents (I believe that to be true).>> > > Greetings, > Stanwood's methods consist of alterations to one or more of geometry, > weights, and springs. Action geometry is a MAJOR component of Precision > Touch Design. 'cuse me.... my understanding of the Stanwood method relating to patent rights is that the matter is quite precisely defined. Indeed it has to be or patent laws would be like useless. Your "definition" (if it was meant as such) is waayyyy to broad to be of any use in this relation. Tho addmittedly it does accuratly describe the domain he is in. However.. the statement (the WHOLE statement) Terry writes above is most certainly true. Neither David or anyone else can be issued a patent for "action geometry". Way too vague a term. I think most of this is pretty well covered in the information provided by the Stanwood Kit. > > Regards, > Ed Foote RPT -- Richard Brekne RPT, N.P.T.F. Bergen, Norway mailto:Richard.Brekne@grieg.uib.no
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC