Synergistic Red Fuse ...

Hi Tom (Theaudiotweak),

As you are no doubt aware, the claims section of a patent defines in very precise terms exactly what the invention or inventions is or are for which the patent holder is granted exclusive rights. A patent attorney will attempt to word those claims as broadly as possible, to make the protections provided by the patent as broad as possible, but without wording them so broadly that a claim encompasses an invention previously made by someone else, which might invalidate the patent or cause it to not be granted in the first place.

In this case, every one of the 10 claims, either directly or by reference to one of the other claims, clearly and specifically refers to applying an acoustic paint to a wall, the paint having been formulated in one of several different specifically defined ways, for the purpose of improving the acoustics of the room.

As a licensed patent attorney, I can tell you that if another manufacturer were to market fuses that have been treated with a paint formulated identically to any of the paint formulations defined in the patent, and Mr. Denney sought to bring an infringement suit on the basis of that patent, he would not get to square one with his suit.

Best regards,
-- Al

Al

You are the expert on patents..I do have limited exposure on these matters and open for many corrections and have been.

I don't ever remember saying the paint patent had anything to do with the blue fuse. Somehow all that became mixed together. You and I found the new paint patent and I agree it has nothing stated about the fuse.

Acoustic paints and surface additives are very intriguing and so is the SR patent.  In claim 1 of the paint patent it states.... a resonant frequency so that the crystalline material will resonate in response to the sound generated by the source. What is the source? Could the source be another SR product as from the Atmosphere series?  Thinking out loud. Will music or crowd noise be specific in frequency and  level to activate a desired  resonant response? Tom

Thanks, Tom.  Yes, it was a different member, not you, who has been asserting that "the patent for ’UEF Technology’ is the paint," claiming that Mr. Denney’s Acoustic Paint patent is what SR’s description of the Blue Fuse is referring to when it states that the fuse has been "engineered with our patented UEF Technology." As you realize, I have disagreed with his assertion, and I have also stated that none of the four patents you and I have discovered to have been granted to Mr. Denney have anything to do with fuses.

All of this has been in response to a question that was posted several days ago asking if someone could identify the patent referred to in the Blue Fuse description.

Regarding your question about the sound source, the claims appear to be worded broadly enough to encompass any audible source of sound in a listening room. While it is stated elsewhere in the patent that "in many cases, the sound is emitted from a speaker ...."

I can’t answer your last question.

Best regards,
-- Al

Crystals react to energy. The energy could be acoustic waves, I.e., mechanical energy or vibration such as structureborne vibration. Both are application of my crystals. In other words crystals act as "resonators" and dissipate (unwanted) energy. Along the lines of those tiny little resonator bowls. If an entire wall was painted with a crystal bearing paint it seems to me the "wanted" frequencies would be dissipated along with the unwanted ones. Kind of like using too much Sonex or whatever. The room would become an anechoic chamber, which is probably not a good thing. But I’m just guessing how acoustic paint would actually be applied to room walls. If acoustic paint was used sparingly on walls, in specific locations such as first reflection points, then it would make more sense.  The crystals could also react to energy of RFI/EMI in the room, presumably reducing the level of same.