|
The
idea isn't new per-se, but perhaps the design is? I don't know enough
about it....
I'm
sure if Microshaft decided to get in on the act for instance, no, Keith
wouldn't
have the resources to fight them.
OTOH,
the UK market may be large enough for Doxey Inc to earn Keith a reasonable
income, without worrying about overseas sales (soz to any oversees Kat5 ppl
out
there!)
It
might not be as enforcable in practice as one would like, but that doesn't
mean
you shouldn't bother....
The
PDA motion ppl didn't have to buy George's device for manufacture - they
could
easily have made another one, same colour as the IPaq & called it
something
else.
Equally, Compaq don't appear to have come down on George for
producing a
CF sleeve for the iPaq - which is exactly what they do, it's just a
different
one.
Maybe
PDA motion went to George because a) he was there first with a slimmed
down,
nicer looking CF sleeve, b) he had already gained a bit of a following on
the
web, so there's a 'starter' market there already, c) George would endorse
the
produce, therefore legitimising it to his loyal fans, and d) It was
probably a
lot less hassle than taking a chance that George would sue them - even if
he
didn't have the resources to see it through.....
See
any similarities between this situation & Kat5?
OTOH,
if everyone one had KAT5, where would we turn next for that must-have
technology
to be the envy of all our m8s? :-)
Tony
-----Original
Message-----
From: Mark McCall
[mailto:mark@xxxxxxx]
Sent: 29 January 2002
11:26
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxxSubject: Re: [ukha_d] KAT5
Website Updated
Personally I know little or nothing about
copyright/patenting. But I wonder is it even possible to patent this
idea? You can buy similar products from many different companies -
although none that are any where near Keith's prices! If the product
was
being "formalised" in this way it also
brings
up the subject of CE approval - which costs thousands.
Also, say a company in the US started to
produce
something very similar in the morning - would Keith have the resources to
fight a large company in a foreign country?
So...I recon copyrighting KAT5 would be either
impossible, or un-enforceable.
This may be all the more reason to get into
bed
with a manufacturer now. What do you think Keith?
M.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 11:15
AM
Subject: RE: [ukha_d] KAT5 Website
Updated
I
will repeat my initial statement, as I think it's
important:
"I
HOPE Keith has copyrighted or otherwise protected his
work!"
For
more information: http://www.automatedhome.co.uk
Post message: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Subscribe:
ukha_d-subscribe@xxxxxxx
Unsubscribe:
ukha_d-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx
List owner:
ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is
subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
********************************************************************
Visit our Internet site at http://www.rbsmarkets.com
This e-mail is intended only for the addressee named above.
As this e-mail may contain confidential or privileged information,
if you are not the named addressee, you are not authorised to
retain, read, copy or disseminate this message or any part of it.
********************************************************************
| Yahoo! Groups
Sponsor |
ADVERTISEMENT
;) |
|
|
For more information: http://www.automatedhome.co.uk
Post message: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Subscribe: ukha_d-subscribe@xxxxxxx
Unsubscribe: ukha_d-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx
List owner: ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
|