Eco ignition

Is this the same company that has a name on the patent with public domain info? See under applicants "ECO IGNITION"

EcoIgnition - Earth friendly performance
YouTube - SparkAmp X40 from Eco Ignition ID9329

was Aquapulser

Yes, they used to be Aquapulser - Aquapulser learned how to make
the plasma ignition from the Water Sparkplug thread.

I never had a problem with them turning it into a business as it was
public domain info but trying to claim to "invent" something they didn't
is despicable - and to prevent anyone else from commercially making
an ignition based on the simple method that I showed Luc how to do
is reprehensible. Especially when Luc had always acted like he had
everyone's best interest at heart and turns around and tries to take
credit for something I showed him how to do. I only found this today.

Aaron thats thrown me man, of all people, what does Luc have to say about this? We must put time and dates on every thing in the open source community. Its the only way, we have records of your info with the dates you mention, its in the document and in the server log.

Man excuse me but this is BS. I think kits are okay, but the open source community has the right to produce these , not the patent route, and we will protect things and they will remain as such. Where the hell is Luc. How can he explain this?

For your information

Hi Aaron and all,

I'm sorry you did not PM me to ask me about the Patent before you made all the posts in the older topic and lock it.

Aquapulser / EcoIgnition approached me a year ago and asked me if they could Patent the circuit since they had invested much in making the first marketed version of the circuit and wanted the prevent a large corporation to do so. I agreed to sign the patent as basic inventor of the circuit.

Aquapulser / EcoIgnition held 95% of shares of the patent which were divided by 2 partners and I was happy with 5% since I did not contribute a cent towards all costs.
The understanding between us (three) was to allow all private researcher to use and develop the circuit as they wish. The patent was only to prevent large industry to capitalize on open source efforts.

Recently the two partners had a disagreement and one of them was worried that the other partner may sell the Patent. After much dealing with all this I agreed to teamed up with one to create a majority. I signed a document to dissolve EcoIgnition and a document to re-direct the patent back to me for safe keeping.

These documents have just been filed, so it will take some time to get the Patent back.

I have been out of country since November 3rd and had to deal with all these problems (over 3 months) from a remote 3rd world country village that I'm been giving and still giving my free services to help the people and mission.

I have never received one cent from the above and I don't care to receive anything as this is not my goal or way of life. This was done to protect the circuit and open source free users and to also allow these guys to make a little money on their investments from people who want to buy a plug and play version of the circuit.

I see nothing wrong with my actions and those of Aquapulser / EcoIgnition who have made such a large investment and the first ones to professionally market a version of the circuit.

I have very limited access to internet so I cannot be more involve during my overseas mission. I will be back in Canada after April 28th.

Scincerely

Luc

@Gotoluc

Well Luc, I'm sorry that you did not PM or contact me in other ways
before claiming my invention of the simplified method for the plasma
ignition as your own and their own. What you brought to the table was
the plasma method using the diodes coming off the bridge of an inverter
going directly to the top of the plug. I am the one that showed you and
everyone else how to simplify this by connecting the diodes to the cap
+/primary + to the HV of the coil.

This is indisputable. Everyone would remember, who was paying attention,
that I was even met with resistance by a few. They
continued to claim it was the inverter output that was necessary for
the plasma effect and I said NO, and then proceeded to prove to everyone
that just the CDI cap and diodes were all that were necessary. There was
a lot of discussion on this fact and it is documented here and elsewhere.

The patent revolves around this simplified method. The other patents
on plasma ignitions use a regular spark on the front side and a second
power supply to charge a cap in parallel and that is the LV high current
source. I am the one that eliminated the need for this by showing the
simple method of using the front side cap for BOTH, the source of power
for the primary AND the source of the LV with the diodes. Therefore,
the patent application is fraudulently claiming to have invented that
method when it was mine and I placed it into the open source - not you.

I am also the one that invented the booster cap method as a way to
amplify the plasma by having the simplified plasma method on the front
and then adding another cap in parallel as a supplemental LV source and
this is documented as well. I wonder if you or someone else is going to
try to patent that and take credit for that too? I see Aquapulser /
EcoIgnition has amplifier modules - I wonder if it is based on my booster
cap method.

I ALWAYS gave you credit for bringing that diode concept to the public
awareness, which was to add a low voltage source to a high voltage
source for ignition purposes - again, you did it with an inverter and I
showed both can be done with the same cap on the front side.

It is 100% irrelevant what the understanding was between you three.
Are you kidding me? To allow private researchers to use the circuit? Even
if it was patented by a large corporation, that does NOTHING to stop any
private researcher from experimenting with that circuit. So that point
you make doesn't mean anything. Nobody needs your permission, their
permission or anyone else's permission to experiment with a public domain
circuit I placed in the public domain. Again, that patent has nothing to do
with feeding an inverter's power directly to the top of a plug through
diodes, which was what YOU were doing - your patent application is all
about the simplicity that I brought to the table in the Water Sparkplug
thread. You cannot deny that.

And by the way, it is an application, not a patent. But in any case, would legally prohibit anyone from building that ignition and selling
it, which is what ANYONE should be able to do WITHOUT anyone's
permission just like what Aquapulser did to begin with. I never
had a problem with Aquapulser making money with the information
presented here - I just didn't know that behind the scenes there was an
attempt to legally block anyone else from making and selling it. That is
just plain unethical to claim other people's innovations as their own
and then try to block others from using it commercially.

Unless there is some kind of legally binding document between the owner's
of the patent that gifts or discloses to the public the right to
create and sell these ignitions based on this circuit WITHOUT being required
to pay any royalties, then your claim of the patent being used to protect
us small guys is completely unbelievable. Perhaps this is your intent but
why go about it in such a shady way? The moment the application
was filed or published, you should have been up front in your dealings
and posted here that what you did and why and that this was to prevent
a major corporation from doing anything with it?

Even if you did that, that would only be good for one side of the coin,
but the other - it is still wrong to list any of your names as the inventor
as none of you invented the simplified plasma method - I did.

Using a patent to "protect" open source developers is completely
contradictory and flies in the face of the whole community and is
personally insulting and damaging to me and I believe to others in
the open source energy movement, but I'll just speak for myself.

So you see nothing wrong with your actions. It is irrelevant that they
invested money to make the circuit based on OPEN SOURCE information.
So money investment to you is the go ahead to take the opportunity
away from others. And again, you see nothing wrong with claiming an
invention as yours when I'm the one that showed you how to simplify
the circuit as claimed in the patent. That is stealing, it is dishonest and
is falsely representing yourselves to the federal government as inventing
something that you did NOT!

June 27, 2008, you posted the inverter output direct to the
top of the plug.

July 3, 2008 - I presented to the public the simple way that is attempting
to get patented by you and the other two.

July 13, 2008 - 10 days later you modify your diagram to match what I
taught you how to do - I remember when you did that and noticed that
you did not even give me credit on your updated post for being the one
that showed you how to do that in the first place. I just didn't want to
say anything.

Your reasoning for getting a patent and the justification because
Aquapulser invested money is completely amoral and lacks any kind of
ethics whatsoever. That says, because someone spent money to
make the ignition circuits, it is ok to claim someone else's invention as
their own. That doesn't sit right with me Luc.

I am completely appalled by this and feel like I have
been stabbed in the back by someone that I have constantly supported
and given credit to, whenever credit was due.

I even named some of my Gray type circuits "Murakami-Gotoluc-Gray"
just to honor you for first bringing the diode and LV source method to my
mind even though I was using the simplified plasma method that I
invented. And of course using an inductor in the booster cap circuit to run
a motor is another one of my inventions - that someone else tried to say
I stole their copyrighted circuit when in reality, he stole it from me!

The right thing to do is to contact the IP attorney in Seattle and the
USPTO to withdraw the application since all three "inventors" listed
on the patent are misrepresenting themselves. If anyone should be
listed as the inventor of the simplified plasma method that covers
these points, it's me:

1. Allows the CDI cap to be used as both the primary coil input source AND
the LV current source without a secondary power supply.

2. Allows the diode to be placed between the cap + or primary + directly
to the top of the HV output. I first showed it connected to the cap
and when the cap is connected to the primary +, it is the same thing
as connecting the diode there. Peter suggested trying it there directly and
connecting it to the + on the primary and going directly to the HV for
simplicity sake and it worked the same - make it more simple.

3. Allows for the reduction in extra unnecessary components -
automatically implied by points #1 and #2.

Between point 1 & 2, my innovations on the plasma circuit and Peter's
recommendation paved the simplicity path for everyone. If it wasn't
for that, it is possible that everyone might still be convinced that to make
plasma, an inverter needs to be connected to the top of the plug. My
booster cap method makes the s1r method obsolete and safer I believe
instead of having either AC or rectified AC tied directly to the plug.

What you do next will be all telling.

@Luc

Luc,

If you want to take the conversation private, you have my email.

I posted publicly because the entire Water Sparkplug journey has
been public and the application is obviously public. Everything I
posted is true and can be deduced by the historical records in this
forum and elsewhere.

Maybe it's time to set up a Community Product Development Agreement so when someone mass produces a tool that was created/improved in the forums then the critical players involved will be acknowledged/compensated. This way we don't have to worry about patents/fees/lawyers/lawsuits and it opens up for more open sharing the "secrets" that seem to be within all of these things. This agreement may even foster more work and sharing due to people wanting to be a critical player in its development.

This could be done within the by-laws of this site or posted as a sticky. It could also be done in the first post of a new device that is to be researched. It could list the key players who have played crucial roles in the products development and can be edited in order to add people to it as they add worth to the project.

These people would then be required to be added to the "inventors" list if the device was to be patented.

But, in any case, make sure to submit your public domian inventions to the Patent Office every year so they don't have to work hard to reference it and can deny other patent applications that come after it. All it cost's is a postage stamp and printed paper to document your public domian claims with the patent office, it's known as the poor mans patent. It protects your idea from anyone wanting to limit or control it's ownership or manufacture and allows anyone to make it.

rw

A general purpose license keeps every one on the same page, but the point here is, we are open source engineers every one should be on the same page. I am sorry Aaron had to find out that way. Any how. There are dates to prove this was in the public domain. It is public domain info.

People that come in like Aquapulser and ask people to patent OPEN SOURCE INFO is not the right thing to do, its not, it takes engineers away too.ill give this some thought over the coming weeks.Aaron for what its worth, you deserve better OBVIOUSLY.

Ash

I'm disappointed to read this also... but on the other hand it makes me happy to see the truth come out, and to realize this can easily be made into a very reliable, commercial working unit

Aaron, I don't know if you realize it, but I had my doubts about you and your motivation in the past, but I don't anymore, and I REALLY appreciate everything you've done helping this community, not just with the plasma circuits, but also, and mainly, in hosting the site and all the time and effort you've spent in actually being a hard working experimenter.

I always thought auquapuler was similar to the basic water spark plug stuff shown by you, but I never realized it was THE SAME
that being said, I know they recommend it as an impulse source for driving a Tesla coil as an alternative to a quenched spark gap.....
What can you tell me about this application, and have you tried it? Now that I know what's up, I realize I really don't need their over-priced product which I had considered buying, nor will I ever give them my money. I'm almost certain that something similar to the 3 point plasma circuit is what Tesla ended up using to insure his unidirectional impulses in his spark gaps.

On a side note, I was successful in triggering a plasma burst across a crude 3 point gap with a disposable camera pumping the low voltage cap, and my plasma ball in sound activated mode as the trigger source, jumping into 3 microwave diodes when I clap or tap the circuit to trigger it via vibration. NOT perfect because the plasma ball circuit puts out a burst (which is NOT as short in duration as 1 pulse to an ignition coil) which is alternating current and I don't have enough H.V. diodes to add to that H.V. side.... My next idea is to pulse a flyback from a small t.v. that has built in diodes.

Aaron is a very liberal dood, AND respectful he wants to do the right thing, Luc has good intentions , however in this case if Luc makes a mends some how and learns from this then i know that we as a community can accept that, Aaron will too with some sort of balance for Aarons hard work.

How many here can say that when an open source invention comes out they will stand their ground. I know there are a few who will- i trust them so , so should you! Enough said.

There will never be a condition where you have to patent, just talk to the community and we can sort some thing out. Hope we all balance this out in some way. My condolences to Aaron. He is a hard worker.

Ash

Energy Efficient Plasma Generation - fraudulent claim of invention

Picture is worth a thousand words - just want to post this for an easy
at a glance view of the facts about the fraudulent patent application:

Ahh, this patent is still in application mode, I thought it was granted. Just find the patent clerk handling this application and supply them with your data, end of story.

Public Use - ineligable for patent

It is already being blocked pursuant to:
2133.03(a) "Public Use" [R-5] - 2100 Patentability

2133.03(a) "Public Use" [R-5] - 2100 Patentability

I am sorry but I must say that these are the causes of our problems today, if people understands the basic truth, then everyone will be able to fulfill their needs freely withou having to be greedy or steal from others.

the enviroment is abundant with everything that one may need, you just need to re-gain your natural sensory so you may see.