Quote from bali_survivor:
on this board we have our own Charlie Dow / Proflogic / William (Bill) Schamp who has filed a patent application to use an ergodic used with the Larry Williams HH - LL and minor LL - HH.
His system is curvefitted to todays sideways market and it is very obvious he is using it to impress / bully people.
Something loose in the minds of these people but what is more alarming is the crazyness of the patent office. After all this is not what the patent office was created for.
Maria
How 'bout this: Optioncoach's SPX Option System(TM) (patent pending)? You'll be a billionare!Quote from optioncoach:
She wants to patent a covered call strategy LOL. What was going through her mind.... If she gets it, does she then send a cease and desist order to all those covered call websites? Will she then go after synthetic equivalents such as naked puts? Will we now have to call it Kim Calls instead of covered calls?
It amazes me she charges $3,000 for a seminar and then has people sign a non-disclosure agreement. Do these people really think her covered call strategy is so unique when the reality is she is protecting her $3,000 per person payoffs. I always say how obscene it is for someone like her to charge so much money but if fools line up and pay for it, I cannot really blame her.
Quote from Choad:
How 'bout this: Optioncoach's SPX Option SystemTM (patent pending)? You'll be a billionare!![]()
Makes about as much sense. Kind of like getting a patent on an algebra equation.![]()
I hope it's rejected...
Quote from HoustonMark:
Whether a trading method should be patentable or not I leave to others.
Bill's "curve fitted method for sideways markets" bullied 6 ES points for me in two hours this morning. I haven't had a bad day in weeks.
If you ever studied his system and didn't "get it", my sympathies.
If you are just knocking his method based on the uninformed opinion of others, I would be pleased to take the other side of your trades.
Any challenge to this could find enough 'prior art' to cloud this issue. Also, anyone interested in applying this approach could 'snowflake' the process with minor changes and be able to say, "our process is different, there is no overlap, because a, b, c, d". The differences could be minor but enough to insure a very expensive defense. This application is vague enough to make defense very difficult.Quote from Investorsources:
This patent will never be enforceable.
Quote from makosgu:
Thank you. It is so troubling why individuals speak of things they do not know. "curve fitted"... HUH? Do they understand what it is to curve fit? If you can be consistent across multiple markets across its entire history and then forward apply the same consistencies, how is that "curve fitted". Even so, you can simulate and find that the results are "NOT CURVE FITTED". Acrary has posted a tremendous amount of information in test for whether results/technique is curve fitted.
I join you on your side as an informed person. We'll keep chugging...
Kind Regards HM,
MAK