RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


DomKen -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/13/2011 4:43:36 PM)

Neither JLF nor I said that organizations cannot be assigned patent rights. However the original claim was that the feds applied for 11 patents directly. That is impossible.




Kirata -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/13/2011 5:08:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Neither JLF nor I said that organizations cannot be assigned patent rights.

Wrong tune, Fred. This is the ownership song.

DK: organizations cannot own a patent... The US government has a lot of patent rights assigned to them but that isn't the same.
JLF: Only a NATURAL person can own a patent

K.




jlf1961 -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/13/2011 5:15:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961


Save yourself from futher embarrasment and stop posting -- especially to me.  You've been proven wrong. [8|]





How can quoting the damn law be proven wrong. If you had any common sense at all, you would realize that realone is nothing more than a troll and you are nothing more than a sock puppet. Why dont you and real go form a mutual appreciation society and leave the intelligent people to use this board.




jlf1961 -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/13/2011 5:22:26 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Neither JLF nor I said that organizations cannot be assigned patent rights.

Wrong tune, Fred. This is the ownership song.

DK: organizations cannot own a patent... The US government has a lot of patent rights assigned to them but that isn't the same.
JLF: Only a NATURAL person can own a patent

K.




Kirata, we are saying that no company or organization can apply for a patent, the law clearly states this.


In the United States, only a Natural person can apply for a patent. Read the damn law.

Assigning patent rights, which transfers the ownership of the rights to a patent is still not the same as owning the patent. I know a few people who worked for Texas Instruments who developed specific process for various manufacturing of products. They own the patents but assigned the rights to Texas Instruments pursuant to the employment agreement.




thompsonx -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/13/2011 5:24:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen



Obviously no point in any further discussion.  You simply don't know what you're talking about... "steal" is the implication of filing 11 Patents on someone else's work (which the FDA did)... a couple hundred people doesn't/wouldn't cut mustard as a drug trial goes... and yeah, there's plenty of research on CoQ10, but they're silent on it.  Believe what you want to believe... you couldn't be more wrong about soooooo many things. [8|]







What part of "A government agency cannot hold a patent" do you not understand? Furthermore, the FDA by its very nature does no research, nor does anyone working for the FDA.

When someone makes an invention, and does so as an employee of a company, usually the company owns the right to apply for a patent. The exception once again is the United States, where only natural persons may apply for a patent.


How do you think the recent scotus ruling confering "personhood" to corporations affects this?




thompsonx -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/13/2011 5:28:32 PM)

quote:

Assigning patent rights, which transfers the ownership of the rights to a patent is still not the same as owning the patent. I know a few people who worked for Texas Instruments who developed specific process for various manufacturing of products. They own the patents but assigned the rights to Texas Instruments pursuant to the employment agreement.


If the rights are assigned to the corporation who gets the money the inventor or the corporation?
If the corporation gets the money then we have a distinction with no difference.




Kirata -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/13/2011 5:36:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Kirata, we are saying that no company or organization can apply for a patent, the law clearly states this... Read the damn law.

You both claimed that the government could not own a patent. Man up.

Ferchrissake, have neither of you even a shred of fucking integrity?

K.




jlf1961 -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/13/2011 5:51:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Kirata, we are saying that no company or organization can apply for a patent, the law clearly states this... Read the damn law.

You both claimed that the government could not own a patent. Man up.

Ferchrissake, have neither of you even a shred of fucking integrity?

K.




They can own the RIGHTS to the patent, but not the patent itself. There is a difference, legally speaking. Under the law, as written, which I have posted from, only a Natural person can own the patent itself.




subfever -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/13/2011 5:58:54 PM)

quote:

Unh... would that be ALL human needs?

Hey, I hadda ask.

K.


Well... maybe not deviant sexual needs... lol

quote:

However, I wish to state for the record that I, for one, am fully prepared to have my needs met without submission to employment.


You and me both, brother. Ready to sign up? ... [;)]




Kirata -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/13/2011 5:59:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

They can own the RIGHTS to the patent, but not the patent itself.

HAVE SOMEONE READ THIS TO YOU SLOWLY AND CAREFULLY

K.




Kirata -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/13/2011 6:02:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: subfever

Well... maybe not deviant sexual needs... lol

I'm not deviant, I'm just different. [:D]

K.




subfever -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/13/2011 6:04:56 PM)

quote:

Man, I dont know what drug or combination of drugs you are on, but either you are completely deluded or have been watching to much star trek.


We cannot achieve until we first conceive.

quote:

For one thing, there is no, repeat no, political system which cares for all an individuals needs WITHOUT some form of exchange, be it cash or barter.


So far, that's been the case as far as I know.

quote:

Secondly, want to explain why anyone would want to do any work IF all their needs are provided for, again no society can exist without work and services being done.


I've already began doing that in Mm's "What's Your Plan" thread. I'll be adding more there tonight. Feel free to join in.

quote:

A pure socialist system would provide for the needs of everyone but there is still the requirement for work and services, and some people will feel they deserve more simply because of the type of work or services they perform. It cant work.


Isn't it just a bit presumptious to predetermine the end result of something that hasn't been done yet?




Kirata -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/13/2011 6:07:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

want to explain why anyone would want to do any work IF all their needs are provided for

If you need to have that explained to you, you wouldn't understand the explanation.

K.




SilverMark -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/13/2011 6:08:54 PM)

I just watched the video, I will not join the patent argument, not anything I am concerned with.
As to the research involved with treatment, something I rarely if ever mention, I have spent the last 30 years living with this really bright lady who does work in the area of oncology. The system for research, in our present system is in itself flawed horribly. In this case the Dr. could be the best damned researcher in the world, he could hold the answers to cancer, and as it is, he might not get funded.
The research in and of itself must be funded, and the funding can be a huge amount of money, as was stated in the video. If the grant requests are not processed and written to favor the the granting authorities, no research will be done. The practices that have large research departments, such as M.D. Anderson, Mayo and Duke University have people who know how to write requests that get approved. Smaller practices with great Dr.s cannot get the $ to be as progressive in research and therefore treatment as those that have the staffs to walk the grant requests through.
As we all know, Cancer is Big Business, a single shot that restores the immune system can cost $10,000.00 PER SHOT, and sometimes MORE! Why is the cost so high?....It is strictly due to the fact that the research is done by the big pharmaceutical companies as opposed to the Dr's on the front line. The system of health care, health care research and implementation is severely FLAWED.

When big money pharm. companies do the research, the costs rise, when there is solid research and no money to fund it, we lose!...




subfever -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/13/2011 6:17:21 PM)

quote:

The system of health care, health care research and implementation is severely FLAWED.

When big money pharm. companies do the research, the costs rise, when there is solid research and no money to fund it, we lose!...


I couldn't agree with you more.




subfever -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/13/2011 7:09:11 PM)

By the way folks, today is the last day to watch this documentary for free. Time grows short.

To those who knocked it without even watching it, I challenge you to watch it and return here with your comments.




Musicmystery -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/13/2011 7:32:10 PM)

quote:

I've already began doing that in Mm's "What's Your Plan" thread. I'll be adding more there tonight. Feel free to join in.


The more the merrier. It's shaping up to be a good discussion.

http://www.collarchat.com/m_3682853/tm.htm




willbeurdaddy -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/13/2011 7:34:42 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961


Assigning patent rights, which transfers the ownership of the rights to a patent is still not the same as owning the patent.



LMAO, too bad it isnt ownership rights that are assigned, its OWNERSHIP period. Read the fucking name on the patent for gods sake.

Once again:

(a) The Government shall obtain the entire right, title and interest in and to all inventions made by any Government employee (1) during working hours, or (2) with a contribution by the Government of facilities, equipment, materials, funds, or information, or of time or services of other Government employees on official duty, or (3) which bear a direct relation to or are made in consequence of the official duties of the inventor.

Title is not ownership rights, its ownership.






Real0ne -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/14/2011 2:03:30 PM)

I wont argue that but that is the tip of the icebergeroid.

Larry, Moe and Curly will never "get it".  

That tip starts with legal and equitable title. etc etc etc etc......

So that means to get rid of "interest" one must "DIVEST" themselves of all right title and interest to __________ to have no CLAIM.    Well there is not such document in existence nor statement in the 1783 treaty of paris.   heh heh  [8D]




subfever -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/14/2011 2:27:46 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: subfever

Watch how the corrupt system most of you support operates, in this free (until June 13th) documentary:

The Brilliant Cure the FDA Tried Their Best to Shut Down:


Due to the unexpected demand, the deadline to watch this documentary has been extended for another week.




Page: <<   < prev  3 4 5 [6] 7   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875