That's alright Al....I see your post was after 9:00 pm. They have already
rolled up the sidewalks in Leesburg and turned off the street lights. You
can't do much anyway this late at night
I guess I find this whole Twyfords thing really crazy. The plant they
choose to patent is just an average phal. They make a couple of thousand of
them and sell them cheap to Home Depot. The name they put on the tag is a
clonal name without the parents name so the plant would not be a valid
parent for anyone who wants to register the plant with the RHS unless they
did some extra work to research the parents.
All this seems like a lot of work and cost. I'm wondering if they really
did patent the plant or just put the warning on the tag?
I can't believe potted orchid mass market is that competitive that there is
even a need to patent. The majority of the customers buying a plant at Home
Depot just intend to enjoy the flowers and throw it away when the flowers
fade. They pick something that catches their eye during that trip. Somehow
I can't imagine Mom and Pop jumping into the mini-van to run to Home Depot
because they heard that a new crop of Phal Lava Glow just arrived and they
want to get the pick of the litter!
Ok....time to turn out the street lights here in Vienna.
Gene
"Al" wrote in message
...
This is such a hoot. Even the Patent and Trademark Office can't correctly
write a plant name.
The patented plant called "Golden King" has parents listed as:
Phal. (Matti Shave x Orbit) x Bambo
This is the name of Phal Golden Emperor before it capsule parent grex was
registered with the RHS. But the pollen parent of Golden Emperor is not
Bambo. It is Mambo. There is no registered cross called Bambo. :-)
And,
apparently, 'Golden King' is the clonal name on the patent document, not
'Sweet',
I noticed a similar mistake on one of the Pine Ridge documents. Mama Cass
was written Mama Case.
I am surprised the orchid naming system has held up as long as it has.
Anyway, the guards at the PTO found me loitering around the electronic
filing cabinets and ushered me out telling me (in not such polite terms)
to
"get a life." I guess I will just have to live without my proof...
Sorry, Gene, I didn't mean to usurp your thread... It's just something I
do
before I can stop myself...
"Al" wrote in message news:...
No wonder I could not get mine to set seed. It is prohibited. :-) I
can't
believe that propagation by seed is part of Phal Golden Emperor 'Sweet'
FCC/AOS patent protection.
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-P...OFF&u=%2Fnetah
tml%2Fsearch-adv.htm&r=0&f=S&l=50&d=PTXT&RS=Orchid&Refine=Refin e+Search&Refi
ne=Refine+Search&Query=Orchid+AND+Phalaenopsis
That really long link (two lines worth) takes you to the search page at
the
Patent and Trademark office and shows you all Patent documents that
contain
the words Orchid and Phalaenopsis, all the way back to 1976. There are
a
dozen or more patented Phals and it is kind of interesting to read one
of
these documents even though they don't tell you weather it is just
cloning
that is being protected or all forms of propagation. Pine Ridge sure
has
been busy.
Even though Phal Golden Emperor 'Sweet' FCC/AOS is listed as patented
everywhere else on the internet that it's name is mentioned strangely I
have
been unable to find the patent documentation for it at the PTO itself.
The
closest in color, time frame and originator is for a plant listed as
"Orchid
Plant: Golden King"
Taida's webpage claims:
Phal. Golden Emperor "Sweet" FCC/AOS FCC/OSROC
"Very beautiful flower, Large flower, Take the FCC class from AOS, and
our
company get pattent from American."
http://www.servernet.com.tw/taida/presents3.htm
I will keep searching but I feel I am very close to learning from
documents
at the patent office itself, just what types of propagation are
protected....
No, I do not have a life...
"Pat Brennan" wrote in message
...
One of the first patented Phals that I remember was Phal Golden
Emperor
'Sweet' FCC/AOS. If I remember right it was protected from all forms
of
propagation. If anyone cared I guess they could ask a lawyer.