List of vendors selling BMT indicators | Trading Reviews and Vendors


futures.io - futures trading strategies, market news, trading charts and platforms


Trading Reviews and Vendors


Discuss and review vendors of commercial trading products, trading rooms and services, trading indicators or third-party paid add-ons




 

List of vendors selling BMT indicators

  #42 (permalink)

Elite Member
Seattle, Washington
 
Futures Experience: Intermediate
Platform: NinjaTrader, ThinkorSwim, TWS
Favorite Futures: ES, Forex, Options
 
Posts: 6 since Dec 2012
Thanks: 14 given, 7 received


Fat Tails View Post
@DoctorGM: Thank you for your comment.

{snip}

Much of the stuff for which vendors pretend that it is the secret path to riches barely stands the test of high school mathematics. Or in other words, it is both primitive and useless, as its sole purpose is to fill the pockets of dubious vendors. Of course, there are some serious guys around, who believe in what they are doing and who offer reasonable advice. Usually they do not "protect" their ideas by copyrights, as they do not feel that this is necessary. They are keen to publish their findings and discuss them. There are other ways to make money than to sell scam to unsuspecting amateur traders. What about trading the markets?

Hi Fat Tails,

Firstly, let me publicly thank you for your contributions. The last several days (maybe weeks by now) I have been spending whatever free time I have going over your material. Really excellent stuff!

Regarding your last paragraph quoted above: How true, how true. I have learned this from direct experience (but not expensive experience thankfully). Many vendors just change the name of the indicator to hide it's true identity. Clearly they are better at marketing than trading. And I suspect they trade solely on indicators, so they will not be successful in the long run.

Below is some commentary related to your question. It may or may not answer it in the way you hoped for. Please ask further questions if I missed the mark.

This above reference is a copyright as opposed to a patent. If it was a patent, it would already be expired and be in the public domain. I am not familiar with the indicator but with any copyrighted material, you are not allowed to copy it exactly. You can create material with the same functionality as long as it is not a direct copy. If it is a direct copy, you can work with it for personal use but you can’t sell it as that would create damages to the copyright holder.

Revisiting patents. There are lots of lousy patents out there. The examiners sometimes don’t know what they are reading but since they can’t find a direct piece of prior art, they award the patent. I have responded to office actions on some of my patents where it was clear the examiner didn't even know what was being claimed. There are many reasons for this but it doesn't matter as much as you think. This is because most people have the wrong idea about what a patent really is. One of the most important aspects of a patent is that is gives you the right to use your own invention. A producer of some widget will seek a patent on the widget so that they can go to market and recoup their investment by selling the widget. They also have protection against gross infringement should they decide to seek it. Prosecuting patents is complicated and expensive (like $10M per side for a fairly basic case). Recouping legal costs in a patent dispute is not obvious. I have been involved in these situations. In fact, sometimes, a patent holder may be forced to protect the patent because they have licensed it to several third parties who wouldn't be paying the licensing fees unless the holder was actually enforcing the claims. This is important: A patent is about the claims – not the specification. So you may look at a patent and think it covers something but you would likely be wrong. You have to look at the independent claims to determine what the patent actually protects. In the application process of a patent, you can get into a situation (almost always you will) where the claims are progressively narrowed until the claims are allowed. This makes the patent pretty useless because narrow claims are easy to work around. In the case of an indicator, someone might make a claim for the indicator using some very specific steps. Should you produce the indicator using different steps, you are not infringing on the patent even though the functionality is similar or the same.

Now, in the case of a lousy patent, there really isn't a problem because if it is improper, it will fail on the first challenge - either in court or through a challenge at the patent office. So people can (and will) file crap and get it. Fine. They are spending money, time and resources to do that. But it's a problem for them because if it's crap, it will be challenged and they will lose it and all their efforts and expenses will be for nothing. Some companies will even send prior art to the patent office to inform the examiners before the patent is issued (this is often done during the period between allowance and issuance - which is why that period of time exits).

OK, there is a lot more to be said but this is getting pretty long. Let’s cut to the chase – prosecution.

In order for someone to prosecute, they must be able to show damages. This also implies discoverability. Some companies won’t file software patents that are algorithms because of discoverability. If you can’t prove (discover) that someone who is creating damages against you is using your algorithm, then you won’t prosecute. You could get a court order to examine source code but a lot of other stuff happens before anyone gets to that stage. So you can engineer an indicator with the same functionality and use it personally without fear of prosecution. The reason is that you are creating an original work, you are not creating damages by selling someone else’s work and furthermore, discoverability is still a problem for the party wanting to prosecute (by this I mean that if you use it just personally, it is never discoverable). So the only people who are at risk of a problem are those vendors who steal someone’s work and then sells it thereby creating damages to the original author (unless that author releases it into the public domain without restriction).

And here is a common mistake for you to think about. Who decides who is infringing on a patent? Not you, your friends or some person on a forum. Infringement is determined only in a court of law. I have been involved in projects where engineers told me they thought they couldn't develop such-and-such because someone has a patent. I tell them to keep working because they are not qualified to make that statement. In fact, in every case, when I ask them what claim they are referring to, they have no idea. Even in the case of infringement, there are business solutions through fair and equitable licensing or through creative business deals.

So be creative and not fearful when innovating. And keep innovating!

Dr. GM
(Sorry for the long post. I could write pages on this stuff because there is so much of it…)


Last edited by DoctorGM; March 19th, 2013 at 09:48 PM. Reason: Corrected spelling and removed redundant phrase.
Reply With Quote
The following 3 users say Thank You to DoctorGM for this post:
 
Page generated 2018-08-14 in 0.08 seconds with 11 queries on phoenix