inventolux

Nice. Who is your supplier? I use Praxair. www.praxair.com Try using styrofoam boxes for holding the LN2. It evaporates much much slower and it wont warp your cutting boards, and possibly make a hole in your steel counter tops. I like to think of LN2 as the exact opposite of cooking or transferring heat.

So let me get this right, Tom Cruise can eat placenta but we cant eat foie.....thats nuts. I look at this like prohibition. Its just not going to work. Just call ahead, I'll have it ready for you. Ask for the "blue pill". Its quite tasty and no one ever remembers having it.

We are discussing adding tapioca maltodextrin to oil and creating a powdered oil product. I think the real trick here is making actually taste awesome. Thats my lame observation at least. We made triple cheese burgers with bacon and onions. If you go to some pharmaceutical websites you can find a pill press to press the stuff into pills. Very cool.

I think I will stick with the patent process for now, it seems to be going well and the larger entities need a run for their money. Also, most companies are less likely to use new ideas if they dont have adequete legal protection in the first place. So many ideas are created and never used for that reason. The copyright option is too unforgiving and fails to answer the subject of a few things: interpretation of ingredients (my grapes come from row six and yours come from row seven and therefore mine have achieved a little more sunlight and were exposed to mushrooms at night so therefore they are "mushroomy grapes" that produce white burgundian notes which in turn creates totally different sensorial perceptions even though they are both vitus vinifera"), ethnic and cultural diversities new art -vs- prior art. Which brings me to another problem, the copyright of wines paired with dishes (and any liquidious items that accompany foodstuffs)....now theres a real mell of a hess that no judge or set guidelines could provide fair and balanced interpretation for simply because I bought that row of grapes because of its uniqueness and any possible infringers cannot use my idea. Thats a little nuts if you ask me. There is no easy answer. But I think I will continue to file my patents for the sheer principle of it in order to protect my brethren from the evil doers who attempt to exploit the artistry of this game for their own gain and continue to destroy the fabric of creativity.

A law review article shouldn't rest on an unsupported assertion. I hope when you write it you'll note that this is just your opinion, one with which some observers disagree. Would you like to propose a list of truly creative chefs of the past 100 years? Would it be longer than a page? Chef Cantu's thinking seems to have evolved during this discussion. I hope you'll note that as well. ← Yes, my thinking here has changed. However I am not 100% for copyright protection. I think this has the ability to cripple innovation in the restaurant world (as we currently have defined it for food in this forum). I have watched numerous local and non local restaurants use our ideas and not attribute us in any way. Now this is not a practice I support however in order to push the envelope there should be some level of open source (and completely free) involved here. Perhaps responsible journalism could help us out like in the merit of preservation thread. I also want the average working cook to have rights just as the patent familiar gastronome. I train all of my cooks to fully understand patenting their ideas. It has to start at the ground level with the individual employee. I think if a chef has the ability to create, then that chef should accept the responsability that comes in today's world capitalism by following the path of patent protection from larger entities in order to preserve the tradition of freestanding restaurants and small businesses as a whole. If we continue to create without protection in any way we may see small restaurants waste away and larger food chains take over. I look at each dish we create not as a dish anymore but an entire concept on a plate. Larger entities generally dont have the agility with creationism that a small think tank has and arent able to come up with entire entire concepts on a daily basis. They move like supertankers and generally don't take too many risks. That deserves protection. Does each dish deserve a copyright? Not sure yet, but watching this thread unfold is fascinating. I also think we should stop saying the food world hasn't changed for 100 years and nothing new has come about until recently. I have been guilty of making these statements as well but evolution is present in all time periods. How would we define the creative chefs that would only fill a page? There have been countless chefs who have contributed to evolution and I wouldn't be here had it not been for their efforts.

Thats usually what happens when one decides to completely shut out any hint of problem solving and then becomes part of the problem. Do you have any ideas that can solve the problem or do you just plan on ridiculing our search efforts? I realize debate is essential here but the hair band thing (while it is funny) is simply disrespectful and taking this into a child like direction.

Damn.. lost on a technicality based on a deeper level of scrutiny. First of all - I wouldn't say that because he might just do it. Second - please explain to me how a corn dog puree (either all in one or each component seperately) and a methylcellulose cream are so expensive? As the technique for encasing would take little more than time and the ingredients certainly wouldn't cost much - but I suppose if you're talking about serving hundreds of them a day you might be right. As for food stereolithography, that's a pretty old idea - I'm pretty sure I read an article on it in 2002 and I think people have been working on it since SLA and rapid prototyping machines came in to being some years ago with some success in all different contexts. I'm too lazy to post all the links so just do a search on food stereolithography. People are working on having rapid prototyping reproduce organic materials, human tissue and/or are using it to design non-food prototypes of food before they make the food. Allright I'll post a few, to cover a couple of different contexts: David Ryan Design in Seattle recently prototyped chocolates for Starbucks (but not chocolate prototypes) using SLA to hammer out the manufacturing process: http://www.moldmakingtechnology.com/articles/050109.html or an even better and actually edible example: Saul Griffith at MIT designed a 3d food printer out of Lego robotics and a heater, with software made for kids that prints 3d objects in things like chocolate and bees wax, so kids can design and build they're own toys and then eat them. (He also invented a portable molding mechanism to cheaply make lenses for eyeglasses in about 10 minutes with 40 cents worth of material for "reducing the cost of prescription eyewear widely available in developing nations" - among other nano-3d production inventions etc etc etc.) His company Squid Labs runs Low Cost Eyeware and Squid Labs has gotten something like 14 million dollars in grants to further their projects. (So I guess the system works for someone.) Now that is what I call "social enterprise". Though back to SLA - I know I read some years ago about people developing types of corn starch that the lasers in 3D printers can fuse in layers like the non-food material they use now - I just can't remember where so I have to let that one go, I believe they even made reference to it as a "Star Trek Food Replicator" and though I can still find references with that phrase to projects producing work with regards to SLA and rapid prototyping machines reproducing molecules that might one day be able to reproduce food and of people working on ways to "fool our taste buds" into thinking we're eating something we're not in conjunction with that - I can't find that particular reference. Anyway, all very interesting - but again, not your idea, nor your invention. Though as you say - it can be expanded upon. Which you are most certainly welcome to do. ← Why hot dog stands wont be making liquid center corn dogs with cmc cream: Labor, training, equipment maintenance etc..overheads, etc.. Maybe if you charge 10 bucks, but not 5. I am no expert in fast food establishments, but I have worked in plenty in my career. Funny you mention Squid Labs, they are actually the engineers (Dan Goldwater specifically) working with Icosystems to produce the software for the space food replicator. Theres just one major glitch, they have no idea how to actually print food. This is why they have commissioned Cantu Designs into the project. The company that used cornstarch for 3d modeling was Zcorp. www.zcorp.com They have since moved onto inedible substrates. Their current machines prototype at 11 microns per layer and there is just one problem. They have no idea how to print food this way and they cant figure it out. They have moved onto what they do best which is 3d modeling. I know because I have worked with engineers that work at zcorp. Its like I said in previous posts. Ideas are useless unless there is action behind them. Now its my responsability to pay my employees for their creativity in this project and not let the government just have my technology. Its the right thing to do.

No I was not "yelling". My caps lock didnt want to unlock for some bizarre reason. Technology is more the angle I am coming from. Patenting a cooking process is easily duplicated. I am talking about any large entity stealing ideas from restaurants in general. Now with the explosion of experimental cuisine, understanding the patent process offers us opportunities that can bring added revenue back into the business. We should be compensated for our creative efforts. I see numerous new and exciting things in envelope pushing restaurants that have mass market appeal. If this food is not your cup of tea then fine, I realize it can't be everyones. I think its dangerous to judge any food before it is experienced.

Most of everyones fears in this thread reguarding patenting things like freeze dried foods are simply not patentable. Its been in the public domain for too long. As CDH who is one of the only experts here on patent law has stated, patents are rare and hard to get. Of course there are bad examples of patent abuse. You will wind up paying more this year for increases in costs for beef than you will for licencing fees on food patents. You cant just go out there and start patenting the saute technique. Its far more complex and foolproof than that. The thought of holding the entire food world ransom for every technique is complete obsurdity. ← I really don't know what your point is anymore. Are you just asking for another restaurant that copies your food to put your name on the menu as the creator of the dish and plating or do you want them to pay you x dollars to make your dish? Or do you really want the Nobel Prize for Cooking? Which is it? Frankly, I don't care who makes the dish as long as it tastes good. I am not going to order a dish because so-and-so created it. I am going to order the dish because the combination of ingredients appeals to me. Some people are not impressed with floating food and paper sushi. Personally, I don't like my food to foam at the mouth and I can't stand jelly anything. If you need to have your ego stroked even more than it gets stroked by your patrons and food critics then write a cookbook or better yet, come to my world and get a job in hi-tech or at an incubator and invent to your hearts content. Maybe you will invent a new space capsule instead of a CO2 capsule. There are millions of people that invent new things and most of these people we have never heard of. I work with someone who has 20 patents in his name, does he ask me to stroke his ego everyday, no. He comes into work just like everyone else and comes up with some interesting variant and goes home to his family every night content that he did a good job. Well, maybe not every night. ← MY POINT IS NOT BE RECOGNIZED FOR PAPER SUSHI, OR TO HAVE MY NAME ON EVERY MENU ON PLANET EARTH. THIS IS NOT ABOUT OWNING A DISH EITHER. OR EVEN RECIEVING A NOBEL PRIZE FOR ANYTHING. MY POINT IS PROTECTION FOR CREATIVE CHEFS AGAINST LARGER ENTITIES THAT STEAL THEIR IDEAS EVERY DAY. I DONT CARE IF PEOPLE ARENT IMPRESSED WITH FLOATING FOOD OR PAPER SUSHI. (AND THERE ARE PLENTY OF PEOPLE WHO ARE) BIG COMPANIES ARE, AND ITS THOSE BIG COMPANIES I AM INTERESTED IN. ALSO, ITS NOT JUST PAPER SUSHI, IT HAS APPLICATIONS THAT RUN THE GAMET FROM NATIONAL SECURITY TO SPACE TRAVEL TO THE PROMOTIONS INDUSTRY. THAT DESERVES TO BE PROTECTED AGAINST THE LARGE ENTITIES THAT HAVE TRACK RECORDS OF PATENT INFRINGEMENT. ITS ABOUT THINKING BIG AND GETTING OTHER CHEFS TO SEE THEIR IDEAS FOR THEIR POTENTIAL. LARGE THINK TANKS OUTSIDE THE RESTAURANT WORLD DO AND SO SHOULD WE. I DONT BELIEVE IN COOKBOOKS. MY WIFE WORKS WITH ONE OF LARGEST COOKBOOK PUBLISHERS (WILEY) IN THE WORLD. I HAVE TURNED DOWN MANY OFFERS FOR COOKBOOKS FROM NUMEROUS PUBLISHERS. I DO WHAT SERVES THE INTERESTS OF PUSHING THE ENVELOPE OF GASTRONOMY. EVEN IF THERE WERE NO PRESS AROUND IT, I WOULD STILL DO IT BECAUSE THATS MY PASSION. I DONT TELL THE MEDIA WHAT TO WRITE, IF THEY WANT TO WRITE ABOUT EDIBLE MENUS, THEN FINE, ITS NOT MY DECISION AND I WONT SAY NO. IF YOU THINK MY RESTAURANT CAN BE ENCOMPASSED WITH JUST EDIBLE PAPER AND CO2 CANNISTERS THEN YOU ARE MISINFORMAED AND HAVE PROBABLY NEVER DINED THERE. PREJUDGEMENT AND SMALL AMOUNTS OF INFORMATION ARE ALWAYS DANGEROUS. IM NOT ASKING FOR EGO RECOGNITION. MY FOCUS HERE IS REFORM FOR THE HARD WORKERS THAT MAKE UP THIS BUSINESS. SCRUTINIZING IS EASY. CREATING AND IMPLEMENTING SOLUTIONS IS HARDER.

Click ← I dont think that by registering specific dishes in some sort of culinology copyright system is going to do the food world any good. The chef world does not have time to search a database of possibly millions of dish registrations every time a new dish is created. Its way too abiguous and in this case the lawyers would be raping the already impoverished restaurant world. I do think extreme cases such as the one here should be made known to the egullet public (and then the media world) and made an example of. I dont think software is a good example either. It takes many patents to protect even the simplest of software. Just look at Adobe Acrobat just before it starts up. There are perhaps 35 or so very in depth patents (and counting) to protect their programs. Its a very basic question of ethics that comes into play here. I think if we make more laws that tax restaurants then we may be doing a disservice to the freestanding restaurant world and we will restrict creativity. This could get to a point that the medical profession is getting to where doctors are afraid to provide medical advice because of lawsuits. No amount of culinary copyright protection can stop everybody on planet earth from using a dish or variations on a dish. Also no amount of legal protection can stop someone from "copying" a concept. Its about being first to market. Those sort of things are just part of this capitalist society. But that doesnt make it right or in good taste.

Finally, Grandma's secret biscuits and gravy recipe is gonna get the protection it deserves and she might tell us all the secret - knowing she can sue our ass. ← Sorry but thats already public domain, in fact I think I will print out an exact copy of them and then throw on some sausage while Im at it. There is a major difference here.

Well, but why, if this is a concern, would you post things you consider to be proprietary or private on a public forum such as this? Surely by posting recipies on eGullet you are putting these into the public domain. Your reward is knowing that your creations are being enjoyed by others. There is some satisfaction to be derived from this - I imagine. But, as a part of this, you must also accept that unscrupulous persons will exploit your recipies for their own gain - simply because you made these accessible to them - and because they can. To claim anything else is a bit like the pop star (I honestly forget her name) whose photographs recently ended up in Penthouse - and who was horrified when an interviewer suggested to her that men might use those photographs to "pleasure themselves". You make your bed - you sleep in it. ← I agree with your statement however this does not excuse a professional chef from taking 15 dishes and an entire mini bar concept without authorization or credit due to its originator. There are unwritten rules here not being followed. Yes we all take chances by spreading innovation all over the media. But this molecular bar takes the whole act of carbon copying to new stratospheric heights and that is not in a good tradition of creativity and innovation.

Most of everyones fears in this thread reguarding patenting things like freeze dried foods are simply not patentable. Its been in the public domain for too long. As CDH who is one of the only experts here on patent law has stated, patents are rare and hard to get. Of course there are bad examples of patent abuse. You will wind up paying more this year for increases in costs for beef than you will for licencing fees on food patents. You cant just go out there and start patenting the saute technique. Its far more complex and foolproof than that. The thought of holding the entire food world ransom for every technique is complete obsurdity.

Kitware, developers of a free, opensource visualization toolkit used for compressing .STL files for Stereolithography Applications. THIS DOES NOT PRODUCE PROTOTYPES IT JUST PROVIDES SOFTWARE Hot Doug's... a creative, forward thinking (in the context of hot dogs), successful - "$5 hot dog stand". ← I AGREE, HD'S IS FORWARD THINKING BUT YOU WONT SEE DOUG BUSTING OUT A METHYLCELLULOSE CREAM WITH A LIQUID CENTER CORN DOG ON HIS NEXT SPECIALS MENU BECAUSE IT COSTS TOO MUCH. LETS GET REAL HERE PEOPLE AND JUST SEE THE SITUATION AT FACE VALUE.

And you have never run a tasting menu restaurant and probably arent sitting on multiple PCT filings that have intergalactic impact. R&D takes money, prototyping takes money, find me a stereolithography company or a 3D printing prototyper that works for free and I then I will agree with you. Or better yet find me a 5 dollar hot dog stand that is cranking out food ideas that are forward thinking. The truth is I came up with most of my IP when I was out of work and broke. It took a business and money to get them into the market place. An idea does not make a damn bit of difference without action. That takes resources.

I wouldnt write off the money making opportunity of the Mini Bar concept on its own. It is a very low labor operation that produces world class results. I refuse to believe that this chef who worked at Mini Bar for a year just walked into the Mandarin and convinced some high level managers to change an entire room for some unheard - of - idea in tokyo or even the entire asian panhandle without looking at this guys resume and having a full understaing of what and where he was coming from. Getting a job at the Mandarin alone can require numerous interviews and they almost always check work histories and references. That is just for the average entry level employee. There is no way they went with the concept with blinders on. They knew who this guy was and where he came from. I could be wrong but I did apply at the Mandarin in SF over 10 years ago and they checked every bit of my work history and after 3 interviews I determined it was too much leg work for a hotel job.

Chances are 0 in a billion. The chef at Tapas Molecular Bar, Jeff Ramsey, worked at Minibar for a year. What I don't get is why Mandarin Oriental didn't just offer Jose Andres a consulting fee to set up a Minibar branch at their hotel in Tokyo. It can't be because Mandarin Oriental is run by cheapskates. I wonder if anybody in upper management even knew this was a knockoff. ← They dont care, they only see dollar signs. Hopefully someone of integrity in that company will hear about this. If the chef of this Molecular Bar has any integrity then he will either change his menu into his own vision or give Andreas the credit and capital he deserves.

FG is right. There is 1 of 2 things happening right now in tokyo. 1. This entity has coincidentally stumbled upon a concept and close to exact replications of Jose Andreas's Mini Bar in DC. (Chances are maybe 1 in a billion) or 2. This entity has royally screwed up and tried to make large sums of money by blatently copying a damn near entire concept right down to the recipe details of Jose Andreas's concept which has taken him over 8 years to create. Im sure they are thinking we need one of these bars in every Mandarin Orient Hotel around the world! Think again. My beef here is that its the Mandarin Orient Hotel (which is a very large entity)behind this and they need a good ass kicking for being so damn irresponsible and allowing this to happen. I remember JA talking about this concept over 5 years ago and trying to make it happen over the years through hard work and determination. So this isnt cool. Here is a classic case of the big guy thinking he can roll over the little guy. Thats just not going to work and I fully support this thread.

There is no way a large corporation or even a small corp is going to enforce any patent of any magnitude against say 1000 plus restaurants using that ip without a licence. If you decide to make corn flakes sorbet, then you have gone out and purchased cornflakes to make sorbet. You have purchased the cornflakes and now you can expand upon them. If you purchase your brand new food replicator to produce edible origami for your new japanese concept, then its yours. Hack into it and find a way to expand its capabilities. Make millions with it, be my guest. Its when another entity claims invetorship for the initial technology that becomes a problem with me. Or when the integrity begins to slip into the wrong hands. Then its time for some legal integrity. The goal here is not ask everyone that creates edible menus for some cash in return. It is my right as a patent holder to decide who or what I licence my patent to. I choose to charge large corps and give it away to those who need it most. Is that the right thing to do? You better believe it is. IRobots are a great example here. The CEOs of IRobot have designed their floor cleaning robots to be hackable and now we find people making these things into robots that water their lawns and cut their grass. Now thats forward thinking. Sure, there are the paranoid legal lobbyists that think they should own everything and make the masses pay for more services than they are already paying for. Thats wrong and laws should be put in place to put an end to it. The problem is who and what do we put an end to? There is and maybe will never be an answer. Just like creative individuals find ways to hack into IRobots, there will be people who find ways to rape the creative system that brought IRobot to us. The best way for chefs to stay ahead of the game is to remember why they started in this business in the first place. They want to create food. Give the ip away to those that can create and charge those that want to sell and make millions. Use the capital for further R & D and continue to create. In the long run it improves the overall picture and balances the situation. Patently aggressive - yes. Patent integrity - a must.

That is not entirely accurate, Chef. That is for a design-patent, not a "utility" patent -- or "patent for invention". A design patent could conceivably cover food composition (I doubt it though), and would certainly cover serviceware. But for "inventions" which encompass a process, machine, method of manufacture, etc., the process is much more complex, the costs much higher, and the end utility of the patent itself far greater. It will also take several years, requires representation in front of the patent office, and will require much time of the person applying. So, for example, you could easily file a design patent for your "herbacious utensils", but would require a utility patent for the edible ink-jet process. The latter has far more value than the former. In addition, holding a patent is of very little use if you do not have the means (read: $$) to enforce it -- a lesson many patent holders learn the hard way. Most patent attorneys will not take a case on contigency unless there are very clear violations, there is more than one violation, and the violators themselves have deep pockets. And that is why the idea of "patenting" food processes for restaurants has not really taken off. Getting the patent is one thing, using it effectively requires deeper pockets and an entirely different skill-set than is typically present at a restaurant. ← This is where we must understand how to properly execute a rock solid design and utility patent. If a possible infringer sees a patent that will win in court, then they will settle out of court. Its when we deal with bad patents that only cover the specific invention and not variations on it that we wind up spending millions on lawyer fees. Look at the Blackberry situation. I have spent a great deal of time trying to understanding the language of patents so I dont go broke. Initially, it was scary and very stressful. The first one is the hardest but once a system is in place the process can be streamlined and the costs can come down a lot. Through licencing, building a business, and gathering a legal team that believes in the patents that are pending, they were willing to put in their time for a later reward. It can be very hard and daunting in the initial phases. But not nearly as difficult as opening a restaurant or watching some other entity steal the IP. I believe this is feasible for chefs to begin doing. I am not a wealthy person and I come from very humble beginnings. It just takes determination. Perhaps one may need deeper pockets for a long court battle. There is plenty of investment capital out there if the patent is bullet proof. One great example is airbags. One person has been patenting airbags before their implementation in cars and always settles out of court with all of the major car manufacturers every year. He doesnt just patent them for uses in cars, he has applications that run from zero gravity space shuttle missions to submarine airbags. Now maybe nobody will ever use them in those situations, but the major auto producers know they have to settle out of court or face an injuction because this guy owns all airbags from here to the edge of the galaxy. He has created many "circles" of protection around himself. The point here is to think beyond the realm of our kitchens. This way of thinking can stimulate creativity inside and outside the restaurant world. Its simply a matter of understanding how the system works and defining the many creative applications for an idea that has massive potential. I believe that patenting has not taken off for restaurants simply because we have not thought of it. Anytime we dive into the the unknown we experience fear and frustration. That is necessary for growth and progress. Yes, we are up against big money, but history has proven that ideas will always be the driving force behind big business.

Once again, another example of what IS NOT going on here. If you stumble on the next great idea and watch one of those GMO corn seed big corps rake you over the coals for a couple hundred million, then youll understand. Perhaps youll feel good for allowing your idea and money sit in the pockets of anderson like executives. Its more than money. Its resources and just doing the right thing with them. Or do whatever you want with your ideas, they are YOUR ideas. This is no difference in my opinion from say Rick Bayless creating a successful restaurant based on many successful ideas. Here forward thinking chefs are tapping into ideas that have mass market impact. Would Rick just give his restaurant over to some big corp to franchise? NO. So why would we as a collective effort of forward thinkers just hand over our ideas to some large corp. The world is full of bystanders who just complain and watch the world get more screwed up but dont do anything about it. In that case, the greedy Enronians deserve to have your ideas and money you could pay your employees higher wages with. Or maybe this doesnt apply to you simply because scientific applications in food isnt you main area of expertise. Well, keep doing classical preparations, there is nothing wrong with that. But at least realize my position is to imrove the working conditions of this business as a whole. Lets hear from those that work for hours on end to create these scientific works of art. Currently I am the only one here that is taking this position. Im sure other chefs in this category are thinking the same as they read and realize that they may need to begin this protection process. Nick was right, its about intellectual integrity, and soon it will be about intelletcual integrity with billions of dollars at stake. Now thats a situation egullet wont be able to fix with online debate alone. Its going to take time, discipline, understanding and a desire to make massive change.

It costs 80 bucks to file a patent plus the time it takes to create one. If its a good one, it can pay for its self in spades. One doesnt need thousands, just the willingness to learn how to adapt.

Technical Difficulties

I couldnt agree more. I think the entire point here should be to first lock down the ideas that have massive impact potential. The next step would be to only allow those fellow colleagues (creative chefs) unlimited (and free) use of a certain piece of IP and then charge those that have intentions of selling it to the masses. The key move here is not to disclose any information outside the kitchen until a rock solid patent has been filed so it doesnt leak to the wrong entities. If someone plans on taking a creative idea for the sole purpose of making millions, well then its time to pay up. Its an idea me and my team came up with so lets see the money. I wont just sit there and watch somebody rip off my teams ideas. That stifles creativity simply because the creator could use that capital for pushing innovation. This is where patents can be a good service to creativity. Now of course there are the bozos that screw it up for everyone and want you to start paying for crazy shit like jpeg compression and "pay here now" technology. They are in it for the money and should go to hell. The only way its going to change is if those of creative integrity rise up and play by the rules to win the game. Patents are going to infiltrate the food world. There is nothing that will stop it. You can look the other way as long as you wish. It wont make the situation any better. The lawyers will continue to get wealthier and the poor will continue to be poor. That can change, the entire business can change. But first we must change our way of thinking. We have to think BIG. They have lawyers, so im gonna have lawyers. Lawyers are like nuclear warheads, theyve got theirs, so ive got mine, but once you use them they fuck everything up. I dont mean any disrespect here to anyone, in fact, my attorney agrees with me (and he thinks thats funny). So just make a rock solid patent and you hardly have to use them at all.

This may be off-topic, but isn't the point that it's OPPOSITE of communism? ← This may be off topic but sometimes I can be a dweeb.