Originally posted by patelladragger
AMG is an attorney - his powers of comprehension shouldn't be lacking...maybe ask him if the issues are similar seeing as he has already posted here about copyright....
But then again I do understand how even a perceptive individual would develop selective ignorance when there is a ulterior interest/motive for doing so.
Ok - you're right modellor, it's wrong for nova but right for any engine tuner you hope will get you some new juice in time for that next big race. Makes perfect sense to me...LOL.
I will see if I cannot be too biased
The issues are actually similar as you have pointed out. However they are not the same as an examination of the purpose and law behind patents will show you.
The "Motorman" issue centred around his annoyance that certain people were copying his cuts on a cut for cut basis, pretty much blatantly ripping off some of his unique developments. There was talk of copyrighting these cuts which as I have explained is not possible. To get protection a patent is required. A patent can only be taken out on a unique individual piece of work. Thus an engine modifier cannot claim a patent on an already invented or patented piece of work. However it is possible that the patent process may deem that Dennis's cuts were an improvement to an existing product and in fact then these cuts then may well be allowed to be patented, even though the original engine patent and design is owned by another person.
The Novarossi issue I believe has been adequately explained by Dennis as sabre rattling. The patent process provides no protection from people modifying your products after they have been sold. It merely protects you from outright copys of your product being made and sold by another company.