Few factoids that I don’t believe have been discussed here yet ..
** “Curiously, BitBills' original website snapshot lists a "© Qugel LLC." Qugel appears to be a secretive project that may (or may not be) similar to BitSpend and reportedly is (was?) an "arbitrage business listing thousands of items for sale."
**BitBills tried to corner the entire physical bitcoin market, filing a patent request that as far as I can tell was never granted. One big reason might be because they didn’t create the idea, Gavin Andresen did - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/printing-bitcoins-could-it-work-737
Despite the fact that it’s pretty clear BitBills and Casascius both stemmed from Gavin’s idea/the above thread discussion..BitBills wanted Casascius to stop making items ..
“We spoke with Mike Caldwell, creator of Casacius coin - He shared with us an exchange he had with one of the co-founders of BitBills years ago that may shed light on their intentions”.
**[00:45] Just to get this out of the way, do you believe that you own any sort of legally recognized intellectual property that precludes what I am doing?
[00:46] yes
[00:47] Would you mind sending me a copy of its registration?
[00:49] Mike, we'll send you anything as we see fit
[00:50] within the next week likely
[00:50] What would you like for me to do? Are you essentially asking that I stop producing physical bitcoins?
[00:52] You could license our tech
[00:52] Do you have a patent on the idea of embedding private keys in objects?
[00:52] I performed a quick search and wasn't able to find such a thing
[00:52] we're in the application process
[00:53] patents take a couple of years to issue
[00:53] in some cases at least
[00:54] you might have a partnership option
[00:55] So what you are saying is you want me to pay you a fee for making physical bitcoins, just so I understand you correctly
[00:56] I never said that
[00:56] You mentioned licensing, so that's how I understood that. If wrong, what do you have in mind?
[00:57] All I'm saying is that it's our position that you've copied our tech.**
Mr. Caldwell also suggested that most of the ideas covered by Mr. Feigelson's proposed patent were discussed in public years earlier”.
Source : https://letstalkbitcoin.com/477
** “Curiously, BitBills' original website snapshot lists a "© Qugel LLC." Qugel appears to be a secretive project that may (or may not be) similar to BitSpend and reportedly is (was?) an "arbitrage business listing thousands of items for sale."
**BitBills tried to corner the entire physical bitcoin market, filing a patent request that as far as I can tell was never granted. One big reason might be because they didn’t create the idea, Gavin Andresen did - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/printing-bitcoins-could-it-work-737
Despite the fact that it’s pretty clear BitBills and Casascius both stemmed from Gavin’s idea/the above thread discussion..BitBills wanted Casascius to stop making items ..
“We spoke with Mike Caldwell, creator of Casacius coin - He shared with us an exchange he had with one of the co-founders of BitBills years ago that may shed light on their intentions”.
**[00:45] Just to get this out of the way, do you believe that you own any sort of legally recognized intellectual property that precludes what I am doing?
[00:46] yes
[00:47] Would you mind sending me a copy of its registration?
[00:49] Mike, we'll send you anything as we see fit
[00:50] within the next week likely
[00:50] What would you like for me to do? Are you essentially asking that I stop producing physical bitcoins?
[00:52] You could license our tech
[00:52] Do you have a patent on the idea of embedding private keys in objects?
[00:52] I performed a quick search and wasn't able to find such a thing
[00:52] we're in the application process
[00:53] patents take a couple of years to issue
[00:53] in some cases at least
[00:54] you might have a partnership option
[00:55] So what you are saying is you want me to pay you a fee for making physical bitcoins, just so I understand you correctly
[00:56] I never said that
[00:56] You mentioned licensing, so that's how I understood that. If wrong, what do you have in mind?
[00:57] All I'm saying is that it's our position that you've copied our tech.**
Mr. Caldwell also suggested that most of the ideas covered by Mr. Feigelson's proposed patent were discussed in public years earlier”.
Source : https://letstalkbitcoin.com/477
That gives me a newq perspective on this here:https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=92969.0
Yes, I'm the psy who won the vote, but I was posting for a friend who designed the notes and didn't know enough English to engage on the thread.
