Pages

Saturday, September 18, 2010

From Hartvigsen's "Bishop", Robert H. Rees, July 6, 09

On Wed, 7/6/05, Robert Rees wrote:

From: Robert Rees
Subject: Re: Hartvigsen
To: watermotor@yahoo.com
Cc: jjh@ceramatec.com
Date: Wednesday, July 6, 2005, 6:25 PM

Mr. Davis,



Thank you for your email messages regarding the apparent dispute between you

and Joseph Hartvigsen. I am the bishop or ecclestiastical leader of the local

unit of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints of which Mr. Hartvigsen

is a member. I wish I were in a position to be able to help resolve your

dispute. However, the Church's disciplinary council system is designed to

assist a member of the Church who has engaged in conduct contrary to Church

teachings to repent and return to good standing. It is not intended to resolve

disputes between individuals. I have known Mr. Hartvigsen for roughly 13

years. He is an upstanding and honorable person and has not done anything of

which I am aware to put his standing in the Church in question. He turned to me

in apparent frustration over not being successful in his efforts to resolve the

dispute with you. But there is really nothing I can do to help. I wish you

well.



Sincerely,



Bob Rees





>>> davis ron 06/25/05 11:33 AM

>>>

June 25, 05



Hello Mr. Rees,



Greetings from Bolivia.



Joseph Hartvigsen had suggested that we submit a

dispute between us to a church disciplinary committee,

to which he would be willing to present all of the

relevant evidence regarding the matters, consisting

entirely of e-mails between himself, his company, and

us.

I indicated that I would be willing to do the same.

Now he is saying that he will only present to his

church authorities only what he is specifically asked

for. Is that a normal procedure when examining an

ethical matter regarding a church member?

Is it possible that he actually made a prior

agreement with the LDS committee that he himself would

be allowed to pick and choose the material on which

they are to base their judgment?

All of the e-mail correspondence between Hartvigsen

and ourselves is relevant to our dispute, and I would

think very much of interest to the LDS church because

he was constantly referring to his own and his

family's relationship to the LDS religion, his LDS

family history, sending me letters from his missionary

son, telling me about the Book of Mormon, even

offering to send missionaries to our home.

Unfortunately, we have come to feel that he was using

his religion to help obtain our confidence, not out of

interest for our spiritual betterment, because it now

seems that he was at the same time engaged in

calculated dishonesty for personal gain.

If so, this would constitute outrageous betrayal of

one's professed faith, and a crime of magnitude in any

authentic religion.

I feel that he now expects his own church

disciplinary committee to help him cover up both his

dishonesty and betrayal.

I feel that by agreeing to allow an organization

with which Hartvigsen and his family have well-known

and substantial connections, and one justly famous for

protecting their own, to review this matter, we are

demonstrating good faith on our part.

Can Hartvigsen say the same?



We could have suggested that we submit the matter

to a similar committee of our own faith. Would

Hartvigsen ever have agreed to this arrangement?



We are quite willing to turn over everything we have

regarding these matters, and expect the same from Mr.

Hartvigsen.

What possible excuse can he have for asking me to

agree to intercession by his church, then, after I

accept, now refusing to freely present whatever

evidence is available? How could this be acceptable to

the committee?

We would be happy to discuss this matter with the

LDS church disciplinary committee if we knew how to

contact them. Could you yourself please send us the

appropriate address?



All the best,



Ron Davis, Diane Bellomy



Campo Nuevo,

La Paz, Bolivia,

tel. 591 2 2493646

watermotor@yahoo.com

www.watermotor.net

Ceramatec's Hartvigsen leader of INEEL Federal Nuclear Energy project, Nov. 29, 04

Nov. 29, 04 Hartvigsen leader of INEEL hydrogen Bechtel

Text-only version
These search terms are highlighted: joseph hartvigsen ineel doe

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory
INEEL Home (http://www.inel.gov)
INEEL Newsdesk Home (http://newsdesk.inel.gov)
Back

DOE News Release
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
November 29, 2004

ceramatec joseph hartvigsen ineel bechtel nuclear energy alternative energy yahoo microhydro

Idaho lab, Utah company achieve major milestone in hydrogen research

SALT LAKE CITY -- Researchers at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory and Ceramatec, Inc. of Salt Lake City are reporting a significant development in their efforts to help the nation advance toward a clean hydrogen economy.

Laboratory teams have announced they’ve achieved a major advancement in the production of hydrogen from water using high-temperature electrolysis. Instead of conventional electrolysis, which uses only electric current to separate hydrogen from water, high-temperature electrolysis enhances the efficiency of the process by adding substantial external heat – such as high-temperature steam from an advanced nuclear reactor system. Such a high-temperature system has the potential to achieve overall conversion efficiencies in the 45 percent to 50 percent range, compared to approximately 30 percent for conventional electrolysis. Added benefits include the avoidance of both greenhouse gas emissions and fossil fuel consumption.

“We’ve shown that hydrogen can be produced at temperatures and pressures suitable for a Generation IV reactor,” said lead INEEL researcher Steve Herring. “The simple and modular approach we’ve taken with our research partners produces either hydrogen or electricity, and most notable of all – achieves the highest-known production rate of hydrogen by high-temperature electrolysis.”

This development is viewed as a crucial first step toward large-scale production of hydrogen from water, rather than fossil fuels.

The major private-sector collaborator has been Ceramatec, Inc. located at 2425 S. 900 West, Salt Lake City. “We’re pleased that the technology created over the nearly two decades dedicated to high-temperature fuel cell research at Ceramatec is directly applicable to hydrogen production by steam electrolysis,” said Ashok Joshi, Ph.D., Ceramatec chief executive officer.

“In fact, both fuel cell and hydrogen generation functionality can be embodied in a single device capable of seamless transition between the two modes. These years of investment, both public and private, in high temperature fuel cell research have enabled the Ceramatec-INEEL team to move quickly and achieve this important milestone toward establishing hydrogen as a part of our national energy strategy.”

“This research is the INEEL’s response to a national challenge to help the United States advance the President’s Hydrogen Fuel Initiative,” said Michael Anderson, DOE-Idaho initiative lead for the project. Anderson also hailed the steady focus from INEEL researchers and their partners for their determined efforts to overcome many research challenges to advance the technology.

“This research effort – building on the regional expertise Idaho and Utah have in this area – shows the INEEL is a hub for hydrogen technology development,” said DOE-Idaho Deputy Manager John Kotek.

The hydrogen production rate achievement of 50 normal liters (standard temperature and pressure) of hydrogen per hour is an initial result, midway through a more than three-year effort by a team of researchers at the INEEL that includes Herring, Carl Stoots, James O’Brien, Will Windes and Paul Lessing.

Hydrogen Production Research
Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham recently announced a grant of nearly $2 million to a Ceramatec-led effort teaming with the INEEL, the University of Washington and Hoeganaes Corp. to continue work in the broad area of high-temperature electrolysis and fuel cell development. This new grant will work to enlarge by 100 times the size of a hybrid solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) that is capable of co-generating high-purity hydrogen and electric power from natural gas. The program will build on a cell stack architecture of alternating flat cells and gas distribution plates invented at Ceramatec for NASA.

“Cell designs and fabrication processes, which are scalable to a commercially practical size, are essential to securing our energy future,” said Ceramatec senior engineer Joseph Hartvigsen, who will lead the project.

Dave Swank, INEEL Thermal Spray Research Team lead, says he and his colleagues will leverage this new funding to focus on refining the fabrication of fuel cell electrodes using plasma spray coating processes.

“Our team has worked for over 15 years to develop process diagnostics that are now being put to use to improve and develop thermally sprayed coatings for industry,” Swank said. Thermal spray research team members include D.C. Haggard, Tim Hyde, Randy Bewley and Rich Williamson.

Ceramatec has nearly three decades of research and development experience in advanced electrochemical ceramic energy systems, and is considered one of the world leaders in planar SOFC systems. Cells have operated for over 40,000 hours, and cell stacks are routinely built and evaluated. Recent efforts have expanded to include developing technologies for hydrogen production and purification from a wide range of primary energy sources. The Ceramatec fabrication technology approach has emphasized the use of mature, low-cost fabrication processes that are easily scaled to mass production. Ceramatec has been involved in the research and development of ionic ceramics ever since it was founded in 1976.

The INEEL is a science-based, multiprogram national laboratory dedicated to advancing the U.S. Department of Energy's strategic goals in the areas of environment, energy, science and national security. It is the home of science and engineering solutions and is operated for the DOE by Bechtel BWXT Idaho, LLC.

-INEEL-
04-086


Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory
INEEL Home (http://www.inel.gov)
INEEL Newsdesk Home (http://newsdesk.inel.gov)

From Brian Kunzler´s website:Comprehensive Deceptive Trade Practices Solutions

Comprehensive Deceptive Trade Practices Solutions

In addition to trademark infringement, perhaps the most familiar form of unfair competition or deceptive trade practice, the attorneys of KNMT can assist you in resolving claims of false advertising, employee violation of confidentiality or non-compete agreements, theft of trade secrets, libel and false representation.

Comprehensive Deceptive Trade Practices Solutions (From Patent Lawyer Brian Kunzler's website)

Comprehensive Deceptive Trade Practices Solutions
(From Patent Lawyer Brian Kunzler's website)

In addition to trademark infringement, perhaps the most familiar form of unfair competition or deceptive trade practice, the attorneys of KNMT can assist you in resolving claims of false advertising, employee violation of confidentiality or non-compete agreements, theft of trade secrets, libel and false representation.

Robert H. Rees:" I am the bishop....of the local unit of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints" July 6, 05

Robert H. Rees:" I am the bishop....of the local unit of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints" July 6, 05
From: Robert Rees
Subject: Re: Hartvigsen
To: watermotor@yahoo.com
Cc: jjh@ceramatec.com
Date: Wednesday, July 6, 2005, 6:25 PM

Mr. Davis,

Thank you for your email messages regarding the apparent dispute between you and Joseph Hartvigsen. I am the bishop or ecclestiastical leader of the local unit of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints of which Mr. Hartvigsen is a member. I wish I were in a position to be able to help resolve your dispute. However, the Church's disciplinary council system is designed to assist a member of the Church who has engaged in conduct contrary to Church teachings to repent and return to good standing. It is not intended to resolve disputes between individuals. I have known Mr. Hartvigsen for roughly 13 years. He is an upstanding and honorable person and has not done anything of which I am aware to put his standing in the Church in question. He turned to me in apparent frustration over not being successful in his efforts to resolve the dispute with you. But there is really nothing I can do to help. I wish you well.

Sincerely,

Bob Rees

Friday, September 17, 2010

Wim Klunne, Yahoo Microhydro Group List Owner: No Reply Permitted, March 5, 09

Klunne March 5, 09 No reply permitted, Message not approved: Open letter to Wim Klunne,



From: Wim Klunne
Subject: Message not approved: Open letter to Wim Klunne
To: "Otto Rike"
Date: Tuesday, May 5, 2009, 9:37 PM


Dear Ron,

I was still doubting whether to allow this message, but your message of today regarding terrorist aquisitions cleared my mind....

Wim


>
> Open letter to Wim Klunne,
> I am asking you one more time--let me reply!!!
>
> Once again you have published highly damaging and libelous messages posted by Joseph Hartvigsen and his cohort "Nando" regarding me and my Watermotor turbines on your Yahoo microhydro e-group site.
>
> The purpose of these messages is clearly to damage my business, our Watermotor project, and my personal reputation.
>
> You are well aware that Hartvigsen cannot provide factual support for the many damaging statements you have published.
>
> In fact, I specifically warned you that the anonymous member "Nando" had contacted a customer through your e-group in order to get her to cancel her order by convincing her that aluminum was useless for turbine runners. You still allowed him to post this garbage. This shows a considerable lack of respect for the membership on your part, and a complete lack of professional ethics.
> Because once again you took no reasonable precaution to insure the information you published was accurate or fair, nor heeded my warning, you have committed criminal defamation.
> To compound this crime you secretly prevent me from responding to these statements, deliberately leading the members to believe I had posted no response.
> This behavior is highly unethical and morally corrupt. Especially so, since you are well aware that you are actively helping Joseph Hartvigsen to defraud the entire microhydro community into believing what is not so.
>
> Ron Davis
> watermotor.net
> watermotor@yahoo.com

Hartvigsen replies to Open Letter to Wim Klunne, list owner of Yahoo microhydro group, March 12, 09

Wim Klunne refused to reply, no explanation given

Hartvigsen: "I have re-read it and stand by what is written", referring to his posting to Yahoo microyhydro Group of Dec.12, 05:
http://www.mail-archive.com/microhydro@yahoogroups.com/msg01659.html

microhydro@yahoogroups.com 12 marzo 2009 • 4:11AM -0400

[microhydro] Re: Open letter to Wim Klunne, http://microhydropower.net e-group, site owner
by Joseph Hartvigsen




Ron,
I don't know what you are referring to in some of your comments below. I will delete those portions in order make it easier to see what you've said, and number the points that I will respond to.

1)
Ingela Carlsson exits, just as surely as her late husband did when he created the spoon design and made the considerable investment in an injection mold. I have received packages of spoons mailed directly to me from Mrs. Carlsson with a note enclosed in her own hand. Peter has offered to take you to meet Mrs. Carlsson in Sweden. Peter has a nice guest house and is a gracious host. I have stayed there. He can show you many nice small hydro sites. His only requirement was that after doing so that you stop making these absurd claims and pay him the requested amount for the spoons you have sold.

Peter was contacted by several people regarding the "reward". He explained the situation and what it has been like dealing with Ron for years. They understood, got a good laugh out of it all and left. This does not change the fact of that the spoons came from the Carlsson estate.

You have harassed me for years on this issue. I've asked you the following and you've never answered - just like you never told me which question in the previously posted quiz you can not answer "TRUE".

>From: Joseph Hartvigsen
>To: davis ron
>Date: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 9:17:03 AM
>Subject: Re: Can you offer any proof whatsoever ?
> Ron,
> Where do you think the spoons came from?
> A. They sprouted legs and crawled out of the swamp.
> B. The stork brought them.
> C. My sister found them in a reed basket floating in the bull rushes.
> D. An alien abducted me and I stole them from their ship before I got away.
> E. Santa left them because someone was a very good boy.
> Or, the only plausible explanation is the one that I've been giving for nearly a decade, and is the one you
> accepted until the owner requested you pay to copy something that belonged to them.
> This has long since gone past the ridiculous and absurd and is well into the insane.
> LEAVE ME ALONE !
> Joe

So Ron, if the spoons did not come from where we've always said they came from, WHERE DID THEY COME FROM?

2)
Can you be more specific as to how I've threatened or insulted you other than just stating facts and history?

3)
Thank you for providing the group my prior posting to this group on this issue in the link

http://www.mail-archive.com/microhydro@yahoogroups.com/msg01659.html

I have re-read it and stand by what is written.
You state "Many other statements made in this posting can be shown to be completely untrue". I am not aware of what that is. Can you please enumerate the specific questions, as I did in the quiz I posted for you?

4)
I can't speak for Nando, but I know he isn't disputing the fact that Ingela Carlsson was Peter's original source for the spoons left after her husband passed away. Rather, I think he is saying (if he isn't I am) that it is irrelevant. They came from somewhere. Maybe we haven't proven to you or the world that Peter now owns the spoons (though as the sole source in the world it seems obvious), but it is clearly proven that you A) are not the creator of this specific form and B) you do not have the permission of the creator or his assignee to copy the spoon and C) you have admitted using a part that I received from Mrs. Carlsson as the form to create a mold for making copies. How would you finding and harassing Mrs. Carlsson like you've harassed Peter, me, Wim and Nando change anything?

5)
If you've read what I've written it is clear. Peter bought the design from Mrs. Carlsson. He (Cargo & Kraft) now owns it. It is that simple. Do I need to show you every place I've told you that?

The details of the transactions between Peter and Mrs. Carlsson are a private matter that is absolutely none of your business, nor is it any business of mine. It is strictly between the two parties of the transaction. There are no competing claims of ownership here (other than your claim of open ownership which has been clearly refuted). I accept the fact that Peter is now the owner of the design. As such, I have entered into agreements with Cargo & Kraft allowing me to produce this design.

It is long past time that you acknowledge that Cargo & Kraft AB of Sweden is the sole owner of this particular design. As I have blocked your email address your admission will have to be by posting to this group. I think we will all be happy to have this resolved and behind us.

6)
They have posted your message as you've insisted. The group is probably tired of this, but I don't need to hide from your questions. Can we now insist that you give specific, clear and rational answers to the questions I've posed here, and the true/false quiz I posted earlier?

Joe


--- In microhydro@yaho..., ottorike@... wrote:
>
>
> Open letter to Wim Klunne, http://microhydropower.net e-group site owner
>

1)
> I do know, and can prove to anyone's satisfaction, that you have been a active party from the beginning to Hartvigsen's and Ruyter's "Widow Carlson" fraudulent attempt to take over the public domain Swedish turgo turbine design we use.
> Hartvigsen had already been using this ficticious story for years, with never any proof provided that their Widow Ingela Carlson existed.

2)
> Just threats and insults, as you saw.

1 cont')
> You were later informed that the Swedish police, government welfare agencies, and five detective agencies found no proof that such a person ever existed. A $1000 dollar reward offered in eleven Swedish newspapers had the same result.
> You had been repeatedly told there was no such person even before you allowed Hartvigsen's Dec. 12, 05 posting to the group (below), (which you have now removed from the archives).


3)
> http://www.mail-archive.com/microhydro@yaho.../msg01659.html
>
> (Many other statements made in this posting can be shown to be completely untrue simply by reading the early group archives.(http://microhydropower.net, search: turgo))

4)
> Now, after years of allowing Hartvigsen to tell the members that the reason my turbines are illegal is because his partner Ruyter bought the design from the widow of the still un-named designer, who I am cheating out of her legitimate royalty payments, you are still allowing Hartvigsen and "Nando" to continue to make the same ownership claim on your site, but now without the widow Carlson story!
> "Nando" is now saying, Forget the Widow!



5)
> You must really think the members are stupid. What an insult to the group!
> Tell me, who do Hartvigsen and Ruyter now claim to have bought the design from, and who am I now supposed to be cheating out of their rightful royalty payments?
> Did you bother to ask? Obviously not!
> Yet you continue to allow Hartvigsen "Nando" to make the same accusations against me on your site, still telling the world that my turbines are illegal.


6)
> In any case I have to insist on being able to face my accusers.
> I intend, one way or the other, to make the truth of this matter known.
>
> Ron Davis
> watermotor.net
> watermotor@yahoo.com
joseph hartvigsen hydro peter ruyter cargo and kraft turgo turbine runner ceramatec micro hydro sweden fraud yahoo microhydro group

Saturday, September 11, 2010

Progress Report on Watermotor Project to Yahoo Microhydro Group, Watermotor in the Andes, Jan. 26, 2005

[microhydro] Watermotor in the Andes

From Ron & Diane
Wed, 26 Jan 2005 14:46:26 -0800

Jan. 26, 2005



We have invented what seems to be the only modern turbine specifically
designed to run machine directly with waterpower.
This amounts to a revival of traditional waterpower use.
The direct use of the the turbine's mechanical power makes it practical
to use much smaller waterpower sources, because 50-150 % more energy is
obtained than if the mechanical power were to be converted into
electricity, then back again to mechanical power. Smaller waterpower
sources are exponentially more plentiful.
The turbine also has better torque characteristics than an electric motor,
and of course can't overheat or be damaged through hard use. This makes it
possible to use a nominally smaller amount of power to do the same amount
of work.
Naturally the cost of the equipment and installation will be
significantly lower--from 50-80 % percent lower.

The main obstacle to the direct use of waterpower to run machines was that
turbines normally did not have an on/off control switch, as does an
electric motor. This is not important when running a generator, but is
essential to the safe operation of a table saw, and most other machines.
So a power control switch was what we needed to invent in order to create
the Watermotor. This took a number of years, and many designs.
The result can be seen on our www.watermotor.net web-site.

We have a small demonstration site on the eastern slope of the Andes,
about 3 hours from La Paz, Bolivia. It is a good example of a minimal
installation that provides a substantial amount of power. It has a 18 meter
head, a single 4" thinwall plastic penstock, bringing the basic
installation cost to around $1000 u.s. We use the power to grind grain,
run a table saw, auto alternator for charging batteries, air
compressor---nearly any function normally using a fixed electric motor.
We would very much like to see the Watermotor made available throughout
the "developing world". The design adheres as much as possible to the
tenants of appropriate technology invention. It is constructed from
universally available materials, by common metal-shop processes. It is
certified 75% efficient by the hydraulic institute of the University of San
Andres. The larger model used a bronze turgo wheel and can produce 20 h.p.
The Watermotor power control switch is patented here in Bolivia.
We are interested in helping to produce Watermotors in other parts of the
world by supplying technical know-how.
The long distance promotion of low cost technology is far more practical
than ever before with the use of the Internet and digital cameras.
We are soon to build a Campo Nuevo Permaculture greenhouse in New Zealand
this way. The builders will be able to consult with us at nearly no cost
several times a day, if need be.
The Watermotor web-site has more information and explanations of why we
chose to invent the Watermotor.
The is also an article about my work in Home power Magazine #71, June-July
1999. It is in the web. Although you will see that the design has greatly
evolved since then, the philosophy is the same.


All the best,
Ron Davis,
Campo Nuevo,
La Paz, Bolivia

Home Power Magazine--Waterpower in the Andes, Yesterday's solutions for Today's Needs, June /July 1999

Water Power In The Andes
Yesterday's Solution For Today's Needs

HomePower Magazine #71 June/July 1999
original article with photos at:
http://ps-survival.com/PS/Hydro-Power/Water_Motor_In_Bolivia_Runs_Table_Saw_Home_Power_Magazine_2004.pdf


Going to work these days is always a bit of a thrill for me--often more than I care for. It means crossing a 15,000 foot (4,570 m) pass over the Bolivian Andes and snaking down a muddy one lane road carved into the face of immense cliffs. The Most Dangerous Road in the World was the title of an old National Geographic article...

World's Largest Solar Machine
Actually I'm entering the world's biggest solar energy machine-the Amazon basin. Towering glacier-topped 20,000 foot (6,100 m) mountains are clearly visible from our tropical water power demonstration site. This mountainous east-facing wall so thoroughly captures the Amazon moisture that the western side-the Atacama desert-is the driest place in the world. Sometimes rain only falls there a few times during an entire lifetime.

But on this side, it's just the opposite. Uncounted streams and waterfalls abound, some falling hundreds of feet directly onto the roadway! About 80 people die yearly on this short section of road, since it is very narrow and slippery. Vehicles that slip off the road can simply disappear into dense vegetation a thousand feet (300 m) below. It's incredible to think that this is the only road into a tropical part of Bolivia that's the size of Texas.

It's a relief to arrive in the lovely 5,500 foot (1676 m) high town of Coroico, near our demo site. Green hillsides are covered with coffee, citrus, and bananas. This also happens to be the home of Bolivia's traditional coca leaf production, so the area is much affected by the U.S. "War on Drugs."

Campo Nuevo-Meeting People's Needs

Our family-sized appropriate technology organization, Campo Nuevo, was started to better the lives of Bolivia's rural poor. We teach them how to use their local natural resources for energy. We show them how easy it is to employ the abundant small local sources of water power to improve their lives. This can help make it possible for them to remain on their land and in their own communities.

We are working with Aymara speaking native Americans, one of the largest and most intact indigenous cultures in the Western Hemisphere. Notable for having withstood the Incan conquest, and later the Spaniards, the Aymaras are now succumbing to the pressures of modern global economics. Like rural people all over the "third world," they are being forced to relocate simply to survive. They usually migrate to a desolate l3,000 foot (3,960 m) suburb of La Paz, in order to compete for unskilled, low paying, and often temporary jobs.

A New/Old Solution

Although they may not realize it, what visitors to our demonstration site see is not actually new. It's actually a revival of the now nearly forgotten traditional use of water power. For thousands of years before the invention of centrally-generated electricity, water power was employed to directly run machines, something it does very well.

What is new is the development of a modern low-cost turbine specifically for this purpose-a "motor" driven by water power. We call it the "Watermotor." It can provide the energy to drive a variety of machines, replacing the mid-sized electric motors upon which nearly all modern production depends.

Lester Pelton, who invented the pelton wheel, produced a variety of these water powered motors and they were in use before l900. They were used to power individual machines-he even used one to run a sewing machine! The direct drive hydro units were replaced by electric motors after the popularization of centrally produced electricity.

Few people realize how closely rural poverty is related to the lack of machines necessary for local production and services. In the third world, the power grid is usually confined to cities and large towns. Rural people still use muscle power as everyone did in the past, and they do without electric lights. The need to generate cash to buy anything they don't produce themselves causes a focus on cash crops. This further reduces their self-sufficiency, encouraging a downward spiral towards dependency on a system that cannot be depended upon!

Demo Site

At our new Campo Nuevo demonstration site, we are featuring practical machines, directly powered by water. There are woodworking tools, air compressors, grain mills and an auto alternator to charge batteries and provide lighting. This is switched on when mechanical power is not being used, run by the same belt drive that powers the tools.

The main attraction at our site is our Campo Nuevo Watermotor driving a multipurpose woodworking unit. The machine is suitable for producing doors, window frames and furniture-necessities usually purchased from the city. It processes locally produced lumber instead of wood carried up from the Amazon forest.

The Watermotor at our demonstration site is provided with power from a water source located 60 feet (18.3 m) above the machine by 160 feet (50m.) of lightweight 4" plastic pipe

. We get 1.3 h.p at 1850 r.p.m.s using 115 gal. (440 l.) per minute with the Watermotor Model 90 , and 2.5 h.p. at 1000 r.p.m.s with Model 150 using about 225 gal. (850 l.) per minute.

At the heart of our Watermotor turbine is a Swedish designed 4 jet Turgo wheel and a patented Turgo control system which provides the same instant on/off power control as an electric motor.
Unlike an electric motor, the Watermotor costs nothing to operate and can't be "burned out" from hard use.

It's Not Easy

Not much of this area is served by roads or the power grid. The U.S. owned (and U.S. priced) power generating system has little incentive to provide long distance lines to a widely scattered and typically impoverished rural population. Water power is the sole available practical source of energy to run machines. There is not a good wind resource in the mountain valleys and PV is just not economical, compared to the abundant water power here.

There are major obstacles to the introduction of unfamiliar technology to an indigenous population that has traditionally used no machines of any kind. These people have little money to invest in anything that does not promise a practical return. In addition to this, the Aymaras are unlikely to be reached by advertising in the newspapers from La Paz. This is why we felt that a local demonstration site was necessary.

Other problems are encountered when machines, however useful, need to be "professionally" installed, maintained or repaired. Such services are frequently unreliable, hard to come by in rural areas, and expensive when available.

Keep It Simple

In designing the Watermotor system, we have tried to overcome these obstacles as much as possible. It is designed to be user-installed, maintained, and repaired because of the difficulties in finding competent, honest and reliable technical services in rural areas of Bolivia. Because the Watermotor is locally produced from common materials, most parts can be easily replaced.

The efficiency of direct drive water power is a big advantage. A surprisingly small amount of water falling a short distance can produce the 0.5 to 5 h.p. of mechanical power required by most common machines. This means that many potential water power sites are available, and a minimum of civil engineering is required.

Of course the power output of the Watermotor depends on the fall and the amount of water that one uses to run it. Here are some examples of other possible installations and the energy output that they would produce:

A Watermotor Model 90 would produce:
1.5 h.p.at 2365 r.p.m.s with a 100 ft. (30.5 m.) fall and 75 gal.(284 l.) per minute.
3 h.p. at 2900 r.p.m.s with 150 ft (46 m.) fall and 100 gal.(378 l.) per minute.

A Model 150 will produce:
2 h.p. at 865 r.p.m.s with a 40 ft. (12.2 m.) fall.and 250 gal. (950 l.) per minute
3 h.p. at 950 r.p.m.s with a 75 ft. fall (23 m.) and 200 gal.(750 l.) per minute
5 h.p. at 1366 r.p.m.s with a 100 ft.(30.5 m.) fall and 250 gal.(950 l.) per minute

The Watermotor itself is very simple to operate, and maintain. It functions efficiently in a variety of water power situations. By merely experimenting with easily changed water jets of different sizes, it is possible to vary maximum power output. This also allows the turbine to maintain efficient output over seasonal water flow variations. A single control handle diverts water away from the Turgo wheel, instantly cutting power.

The Watermotor can be used to drive most stationary machines normally driven by an externally-mounted electric motor or small gasoline engine in the 0.5 to 4 horsepower range.

Machines being driven by the Watermotor can be mounted directly on the turbine housing or beside the turbine. The tools are connected to the Watermotor by a standard belt, which limits the distance between the two parts of the system.

Make the Comparison

How does the Watermotor stack up against the competition? I asked a couple of renewable energy experts to give me the rough cost of a wind or photovoltaic system capable of producing 2 1/2 hp of mechanical energy 24 hours a day, including installation in rural Bolivia and technical expertise for maintenance and repair.

Richard Perez of Home Power said, "Well, the photovoltaic panels alone will cost about US$35,000. And the requirement for 24 hour power at that level means a very large battery bank which will bring the system cost up to around US$70,000. And we still need to add small stuff like racks, inverter, and controls. Overall, I'd say about US$80,000. It really points out how cheap hydro is.

Mick Sagrillo, North American wind power guru, said, "My guess, using off the shelf equipment, would be that you'd need a Bergey Excel. While it's larger than what's needed, it's cheaper than putting up several smaller turbines. Cost for genny and controls is about US$19,000, less tower, wiring, batteries, and balance of systems components. Total system cost would be roughly US$35,000.
The one message I always deliver at my wind power workshops is that if anyone has a good hydro site, they're in the wrong workshop. While wind is cheaper than PV, it's no comparison for a hydro site with a 100 percent capacity factor."

Now, this is not a scientific comparison, and these are admittedly rough figures. But the Watermotor can do this-produce 2 1/2 hp continuous-with a system cost of less than US$2,000. It's user installable and maintainable (two lube points), and easily repairable. It has only one moving part and is immune to damage from hard use. Consider also the sources of PV and wind equipment (all imported) and the possibility of damage from misuse or poor maintenance.

Watermotor type designs were abandoned about l00 years ago in the developed world in favor of electric motors. To the best of my knowledge, there are no machines equivalent to the Watermotor being produced today. Generally, very few products, no matter how useful, are produced with the aim of promoting self-sufficiency among the rural poor.

Making It Available

The best advertisement for our water driven machines is for them to be seen hard at work by the many people passing the demo site daily. Woodworking and grain milling machines in particular have a substantial per-hour cash value. Because the Watermotor is immune to damage from hard use, it is suitable to rent or lease. At current rates, the entire cost of a Watermotor installation should be recovered in only a few months.

We expect visitors to our demonstration site to have their own ideas about how they can use the Watermotor. The success of this site will provide us with knowledge and incentive to build similar sites in other parts of Bolivia.

While Bolivia is especially rich in water power resources, many other parts of the world have similar conditions, and similar needs. We would like to see this clean, self-renewing, and easy to use natural resource made available to all.

Access

Author: Ron Davis, Campo Nuevo, Casilla 4365 La Paz, Bolivia *
Phone/Fax: (59l) (2) 2485022 * mail@watermotor.net.

Campo Nuevo is a California registered 50l(c)3 non-profit organization founded over fifteen years ago by Ron Davis and Diane Bellomy to bring simple technology to Bolivia's indigenous people.


For more information contact Ron Davis or Diane Bellomy at:
Campo Nuevo
Email:
Casilla 4365, La Paz, Bolivia.
Telephone: (591-2) 2485022
Mobile: (591-2) 71527700

turgo turbine peter ruyter bolivia sweden wim klunne brian kunzler attorney lawyer ceramatec water motor micro hydro campo nuevo h-hydro.com joseph hartvigsen hydro self-reliance natural energy

Wednesday, September 8, 2010

-Water Power to the People, Bolivian Times Article, Jan 6, 2000.

WaterMotor - Articles and Reviews
-Watermotor

-Water Power to the People
Bolivian Times Jan 6, 2000.
-Water Power In The Andes
Yesterday's Solution For Today's Needs
Home Power Magazine June/ July 1999
WATER POWER TO THE PEOPLE
by Miles Rohan

Bolivian Times, January 6, 2000
Winding along the Yungas Road, nearing the lovely destination of Coroico, you will pass by a flower-lined stream small enough to step across. At a glance, the stream appears just like the hundreds of other streams you passed. Yet, when you look beyond the surface, you’ll find that this stream has the capacity to revolutionize the way people in the Yungas live.

That is because the stream is equipped with a small, simple device that is powered by the region’s most abundant and clean resource – water. Without using electricity or fossil fuel, this device -- called the Watermotor -- just might bring more equality to some of the rural populations of Bolivia and help curb rural immigration to the cities.

Under the mantra of "power to the people," inventor, entrepreneur, and long-time expatriate Ron Davis has recently created the Watermotor to assist rural people living outside of the power grid – currently about half of Bolivia’s population. Realizing the connection between rural poverty and lack of electricity (and in turn, lack of machines): Davis had many goals, one of which was to ease the gap between the haves and have-nots of the region.

People living in remote locations without electricity still use muscle power. The need to generate money to buy anything not produced by the community creates a dependency on cash crops. When everyone is growing the same crops, profits are small for all. By installing Davis’ motor, it may enable those normally reliant on cash cropping to produce a diverse number of goods which can be sold for greater profit.

Davis also hopes to help encourage rural people to stay in their homes, rather than migrate to the already-overpopulated cities. Currently, many people living in Bolivia’s remote regions are forced to relocate – or spend hours commuting to cities – in search of economic survival. This phenomenon often leads to economic and cultural breakdown. By providing production ability and conveniences normally found only within large cities, the Watermotor may enable people to make a good living and have a higher quality of life in their own small villages.

Numerous Possibilities
At his Yungas Road demonstration site, Davis has the Watermotor set up to directly power a table saw which normally functions with an electric motor. With this saw, Davis and his team use the Watermotor to construct bee hives. The hives demonstrate the Watermotor’s ability to enable highly-skilled production in even the most remote locations. With woodworking alone, the possibilities of production increase greatly, including furniture, crafts and construction of homes.

With the capability of producing electricity, Watermotor’s possible impact increases exponentially. Davis explained that, with a common car alternator (of which there are no shortage in the world), enough electricity could be generated to provide local lighting and battery charging. This could perhaps be the beginning of a water power revolution.

Design and Costs
Davis notes that water power as a source of mechanical energy is not a new idea. What is new is a modern, low-cost turbine motor designed specifically for this purpose. For, ironically in an age when nothing seems to be free of electrically-driven machines, the Watermotor is a revival of the way water power was used until the invention of long-distance power lines.

The idea for the Watermotor, Davis said, has been in his mind for about 25 years. But only recently has it been taken to the next level. Davis credits an Internet discussion group devoted to "micro-hydro power" for helping to make the Watermotor a reality.

One of the challenges of producing the Watermotor has been making it affordable for rural people. Two ways of lowering costs have been using recycled materials and keeping production entirely in Bolivia. For about $ 480 the Watermotor can be purchased and owner-installed in one or two weeks. It is conceivable that villages and settlements could quickly recover the investment with production capability, and money saved by making, rather than buying, goods.

Simplicity is the key to the design of the Watermotor. Usually, the Watermotor can be user installed, maintained and repaired. And with only two moving parts, the motor is virtually immune to damage by hard use.

The water used to power the Watermotor is taken from an irrigation canal fed by a small fast flowing stream. The water then enters a plastic pipe above the workshop where the Watermotor is situated. A flow of 400 liters per minute produces 1.25 horsepower at 1850 R.P.M. This power is capable of running a variety of machines. After the water is used to produce power, it is returned to the stream.

It is Davis’ hope that the Watermotor will first be utilized by the rural people of the Yungas, and then by other people living in remote areas around the world. The Watermotor site on the Yungas Road is clearly visible to all passing by, and Davis invites anyone interested in learning more about his invention to stop by and check it out.

With the incredible amount of technological advances occurring in modern society, it is intriguing to think that the Watermotor, a simple mechanism powered by the very blood of our planet, could help empower the poorest and most remote people of the world.


For more information contact Ron Davis or Diane Bellomy at:
Campo Nuevo
Email:
Casilla 4365, La Paz, Bolivia.
Telephone: (591-2) 2485022 or (591-2)2485159
Mobile: (591-2) 71527700

Tuesday, September 7, 2010

"Maybe it is time...that the Watermotor to be added to the list of counterfeit items that customs agents are looking for".Dec. 8, 2006

Hartvigsen's Threat of Legal Action:"Maybe it is time...that the Watermotor to be added
to the list of counterfeit items that customs agents are looking for".Dec. 8, 2006


Re: Bob in D.C. re: hartvigsen's sole objection to my message of Dec. 5, 06, Joe's claims to Honesty
Friday, December 8, 2006 6:28 PM
From:
"Joseph Hartvigsen"
View contact details
To:
"davis ron"
Cc:
"Peter Ruyter"


Ron,
In my previous reply, I most certainly did not agree that your message
was accurate, to the contrary I stated "I have repeatedly responded to
your errors and inaccurate statements and you don't address the
issues." That can hardly be construed as agreement to a message so full
of falsehood that it is pointless to list them all.

However, your claim in this message that I should pay you for your
illegal and blatant knock-off copies of the Swedish design is the most
brazen distortion of truth and common sense that you've imagined yet.

> By your standards of intellectual property rights,
> you should probably be paying me to copy my cast metal
> turgo runners.

Item number 2 on your own web site:
http://www.watermotor.net/indexflash.htm
acknowledges that these are a recent Swedish design

"2. Modern efficient Swedish designed Turgo runners in
bronze or nylon, converts waterpower into mechanical power
at 80-85% efficiency."

I have repeatedly referred you to the section of US copyright (which by
treaty is consistent with other civilized nation) explaining why your
copies are illegal and un-authorized. I have likewise directed you to
the lawful owner of that right (Ingela Carlsson, then later Peter
Ruyter) in Sweden.

I remind you that you had seen these photos of a 16 spoon turgo runner
that I built, before you built "my cast metal turgo runners".
http://www.microhydropower.net/mhp_group/hartvig/2.php
So, you have not only copied the spoon, but my earlier construction of
the 16 spoon runner (the spoons are sized for 24 spoon runners). I have
not prohibited this as the templates have been on my web site.

I have numerous photos (a selection of which are attached) of the 150mm
16 "orangespoon" runners that you have made without authorization from
the copyright owner (not me). You have repeatedly been asked to cease
and desist.

Whether the spoons were made by sand casting or rubber mold is
irrelevant. Either requires an impression made from a copyright
article, which you purchase from Sweden by way of me. Furthermore, your
10/25/2001 disclosure of your rubber like molding compound stated (last
line before your signature line) "It can also be used to make strong
yet flexible molds for wax casting". The first photos of your copied
spoon runners are dated August of 2001.

The money for your copies was never for me. If you are worried that the
money would go to me or Peter, mail your payment to Peter in Ingela's
name and I'm sure he will be happy to send it on to her.

Imported goods that violate international copyright law can be seized
in customs. Maybe it is time to request that the watermotor to be added
to the list of counterfeit items that customs agents are looking for. I
don't think that we'll have any trouble finding agreement from the
authorities that the runners in the attached photos are copies of the
orange Swedish design turgo.

Joe



--- davis ron wrote:
> Dec. 8, 06
>
> Joe,
>
> Thank you for your comments on my Dec. 5, 06
> message. As your saw, I presented my message to you
> and your lawyer before sending it out because I wanted
> to make sure that it was accurate, so there is no
> question of any "outrageous provocation", as you put
> it.
> I don't remember you specifying which turgo model
> you publicly claimed I was using wax and rubber to
> make illicit copies of. Since your claims to the right
> to collect money from me have no basis outside your
> imagination I cannot see how it makes any differance.
> It is simply grasping at straws.
> What I should have written is that I have never used
> a rubber mold or wax replica to produce turgo spoons
> of any kind, nor have I ever "admitted" doing so. Have
> you ever seen one of these, or can tell me anyone who
> has? You have publicly repeated this false claim
> several times, as has Ruyter, so it must be important
> for your fraudulent assertions.
>
> In assummed that you were speaking of the small blue
> spoons because those are the ones you refused to sell
> me unless I submitted to your extortionist and
> fraudulent attempts to obtain money with your false
> and long term public claims to having the right to
> collect royalties from me on behalf of an old lady in
> Sweden, whose existence neither you nor your "partner"
> Peter Ruyter can ever prove actually exists.
> Peter Ruyter will not verify your other claims--that
> he owns any sort of intellectual property rights or
> that he gave you the right to collect money from me on
> his behalf.
> Actually, as I have mentioned many times, I use
> ordinary sand casting to produce my model 150 turgo
> wheels.
> By your standards of intellectual property rights,
> you should probably be paying me to copy my cast metal
> turgo runners.
> In any case, you and your lawyer have had plenty of
> time to examine what I have sent to you and assume
> that was the only statement you took exception to.
> I assume that you bring that up because you continue
> to claim that I am illicitly producing turgo runners
> for my Watermotors and am cheating an old lady in
> Sweden, who's intellectual property rights you say you
> are protecting.
> Why don't you see if Klunne will allow you to repeat
> your claims and accusations about me on the microhydro
> e-group website?
> Ron
>
>
>
> Hi Ron,
> Thank you for the thoughts on honesty. Twice a year
> the Church has a
> worldwide general conference, the most recent being
> this weekend. I
> spent 10 hours (6 on Sat, 4 on Sun) listening or
> watching the
> proceedings. There was an excellent talk on the
> subject of honesty and
> integrity yesterday morning. You can download the
> audio or video from
> the link below.
>
>
http://www.lds.org/conference/sessions/display/0,5239,49-1-646,00.html
> -> Sunday Morning Session -> Bishop Richard C. Edgley
>
> Here is a summary from the Desert Morning News web
> site.
>
> One way to stand apart from a world that has become
> increasingly
> dishonest is by living principles of honesty and
> integrity, said Bishop
> Richard C. Edgley, first counselor in the church's
> Presiding Bishopric.
>
> "Honesty should be among the most fundamental
> values that govern
> our everyday living," he said. "When we are true to
> the sacred
> principles of honesty and integrity, we are true to
> our faith and we
> are true to ourselves.
>
> Obviously you sent this not for my spiritual
> education, as I am well
> aquainted with this principal of the gospel, but
> because you think I am
> a lying cheat. I feel quite badly that you think this
> of me in spite of
> my continued efforts to explain the facts surrounding
> the issues of why
> Ceramatec suggested adding co-invetors to a joint
> patent on FiberSil,
> and why I believe that it is not only legal but
> rightful to request
> payment for turgospoon copies on behalf of the owner
> of the design.
>
> Ceramatec now has a full time in house patent
> attorney. He is a hard
> working, experienced, ethical and fair person. I have
> briefly discussed
> both topics with him. The definition of co-inventors
> (co-inventors does
> not mean the idea came at the same time, rather that
> the collection of
> ideas presented in the patent came from the
> co-inventors) and the need
> to list them in a patent was confirmed, as was a more
> detailed
> explanation confirming the applicability of copyright
> laws to physical
> articles, without the need to file (as you can read on
> www.copyright.gov ).
>
> If there is anything I can do to help work out this
> disagreement with
> you, I would like to do so.
>
> Joe
>
>
>
>
>
> --- Joseph Hartvigsen wrote:
>
> > Ron,
> > I have repeatedly responded to your errors and
> > inaccurate statements
> > and you don't address the issues. You have yet to
> > try me and send me an order (with 3 USD/spoon plus
> > postage ) for the bluespoons and see if you get
> > them.
> >
> > Your comment below that we accuse you of copying
> > bluespoons with a rubber mold is an outrageous
> > provocation! It is the obviously the orange spoons
> > that you have copied, the photo with the VW bus
> > notwithstanding. You know it, and anyone who looks
> > at the spoons and your copies knows it. I have
> > plenty of pictures and the data from your web site
> > to prove it.
> >
> > Just tell me two things since you won't accept our
> > assertion on this topic.
> >
> > Who do you think designed the spoons and what
> > happened to his rights to his design?
> >
> > How did you get the rights to copy them?
> >
> >
> > Joe
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > davis ron wrote:
> > Joe, as always I invite you and Bob Rees to check
> > this for errors or inaccurate statements. Please
> > respond asap as there is much more.
> >
> >
> > For nearly six years Joseph Hartvigsen of Salt
> > Lake
> > City, Utah, has been publicly claiming that I am
> > illicitly producing my Watermotor turbines here in
> > Bolivia.
> > He originally claimed that the runner (small
> > waterwheel) design we use is the intellectual
> > property
> > of a poor widow in Sweden, and that he
> > (Hartvigsen) had been granted the right to collect
> > $32
> > for each turbine we produce here in Bolivia, on her
> > behalf.
> > He twice repeated this claim to the 2000 plus
> > worldwide members of the Yahoo Micro-hydro power
> > e-group on Dec. 12, and Dec. 20, 05.
> > Contrary to what he implies in this posting,
> > Hartvigsen began making this claim to collect
> > royalties shortly after I announced to the
> > microhydro
> > group that I had finished testing and begun
> > patenting
> > the Watermotor (group archive Jan. 2001) not the
> > runner, but the power control device I had invented
> > which uniquely allows the Watermotor to be used to
> > directly drive machines.He said that the money was
> > to
> > be used to pay for one of Peter Ruyter's turbines in
>
=== message truncated ===

Joseph Hartvigsen
Hartvigsen-Hydro
1529 South 400 East
Kaysville, UT 84037 USA

Micro Hydro components, turgo runners
http://h-hydro.com

Swedish Patent Office:"The main principle is that the one who claims that he has a protection has to prove it." Feb. 3, 2006

SV: Question from Bolivia--Swedish Turgo Design Rights, Mr. Bo Hallgren
Friday, February 3, 2006 10:53 AM
From:
"Hallgren Bo"
View contact details
To:
watermotor@yahoo.com

Dear Ron Davis,

Thank you for your email.

The main principle is that the one who claims that he has a protection has to prove it.
This means if there is a Patent or Design protection in the country where you produce or sell your product the owner of the right has to provide you with the registration number of his rights.

Copyright is, as you might know, normally not registered but it is rarely the case that technical equipment is protected by copyright.

I suggest that you consult an expertienced lawyer in this field.

Best regards / Bo Hallgren



-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
Från: davis ron [mailto:watermotor@yahoo.com]
Skickat: den 2 februari 2006 22:46
Till: prv.patent@prv.se
Ämne: Question from Bolivia--Swedish Turgo Design Rights, Mr. Bo Hallgren


Feb. 2, 06

Dear Mr. Hallgren,

I am an appropriate technology inventor working
with the indigenous people of Bolivia for a number of
years.
We build small turbines with a patented (in
Bolivia) on/off power control switch which allows the
turbine to be used in place an electric motor to
directly drive machines. (See: watermotor.net)
I designed this turbine to use a turgo type turbine
wheel which was originally from Sweden.
After I designed this turbine and power control system
I was told that I should be paying royalties to a man
in Sweden to use this turgo design because he owned
the "design rights". When I would write to this man in Sweden
to ask about his design rights he would not
reply--until recently.
This is an important matter to us here in Bolivia
because we need to know if this man will sue us.
He has been demanding $32 U.S. for each turbine we
produce.
Also, this man tells people that we are cheating him
out of royalty money.
Recently I asked other members of the Internet
Microhydro group we both belong to if anyone knew
whether there actually was any sort of patent or
design right for this turgo turbine design. I then
received a e-mail from the Swedish man threatening me
with legal action if I used this design without his
consent. But he again failed to provide any
information about the design rights he says he has.
He now refuses to answer my e-mails.
My understanding is that even if "design rights"
actually exist, and he owns them, they would not apply
in this situation because my turbines are cast
aluminum or bronze, not plastic as his are. My turgo
wheel are also a different size as well.
Since he has threatened to sue me I must take this
seriously. He has far more resources than we do.
From his statement he is claiming that under Swedish
law he has the right to do this. If he does not have
the rights he claims to have then perhaps he may be
guilty of attempted fraud and extortion.
This has been going on for several years and it has
been damaging to our work here in Bolivia.
We need to know what to do in this case. I feel that
this man would not be trying to do this if we were not
in a poor country in South America.

Sincerely,
Ron Davis,
Campo Nuevo,
La Paz, Bolivia

watermotor@yahoo.com



Here is his last letter:

Sat, 17 Dec 2005 00:01:20 +0100
To: "davis ron"
From: "Peter Ruyter" View
Contact Details Add Mobile Alert
Subject: Plasticspoons

Mr Davis
In my mail of 00-09-12 I have given you my opinion
about your way to
walk at the earth.
I can one moore time tell you: You are at the wrong
side of normal
sense. I am the owner of all produced plastic spoons,
red, white and
blue. If anybody without my autorization copie one of
these products
for using to make repeting production of these
products I am able to
lead these activities to court in any civilized
country around the
world as a case of illegal use of copyright.
If you understand these, we can negotiate about
royalty, copycost,
rental or what you ever like to call the right to do a copieactivites
with our property as masterform. Read carefully my
mail of 00-09-12.
You have allready done many professionals at the group
silent and
without willing to give know-how to the forum.
As I said, you have realy destroyed the possibility
for many poor
peoples to take part of developing works.

I enclose the old mails text, to refresh your memory:
>> Evening Ron and Diane.
>> I am a litlle bit sad, beqaus you not answering my
mails.
>> And when I understand you are using my work and
make copies of our
products.
>> Its very sad, and its a backslash for whole area
of intrest for
spending
>> time, love and monye for developing good working
hydroproducts with
small
>> economical frames.
>> I look for a good explanation and I hope to come
in mode for
spending moore
>> power to develop better things and moore power to
pore peoples.
>> Peter

I have also invited you to Sweden, to have a vistit at
the family
where we overtok the spoons. The widow, Ingela have
ben informed
about you and she is not impressed.

Hereby I invite you again, to visit us and meet Ingela
and look at
her former husbands work.
If you find anything incorrect against all information
you have got
in this case, I will pay all of your cost from the
minute you leave
your home untill the minute you arrive back.

If you understand, during this vsisit, all information
you have got
are correct, you have to give Joe Hartvigsen, my US
partner, an open
mail there you regret all of your activites.
--
All the best!
Peter Ruyter
(owner&responsible)
Cargo &Kraft Turbin Sverige AB
SE-739 92 SKINNSKATTEBERG
SWEDEN

Smallscale hydropower.
2 kW to 4000 kW
1 meter to 30 meter head.

watermotor bolivia turgo turbine cargo and kraft Skinnskatteberg swedish patent office joseph hartvigsen wim klunne yahoo microhydro group peter ruyter fraud turgo patent

Swedish patent Office, Bo Hallgren:"I have, personally, never heard about adoption as a term in connection with Intellectual Property", Jan. 16, 2008

Swedish patent Office, Bo Hallgren:"I have, personally, never heard about adoption as a term in connection with Intellectual Property".


SV: Bo, Question---Does the Swedish Gov. recognize "adoption" as IP ownership?
Wednesday, January 16, 2008 7:46 AM
From:
"Hallgren Bo"
View contact details
To:
"davis ron"
Dear Ron,

As we do not register Copyright in this country we have never met that problem.
I have, personally, never heard about adoption as a term in connection with Intellectual Property.

Best regards / Bo

-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
Från: davis ron [mailto:watermotor@yahoo.com]
Skickat: den 15 januari 2008 20:13
Till: Hallgren Bo
Ämne: Bo, Question---Does the Swedish Gov. recognize "adoption" as IP ownership?


Jan. 15, 08
To: Bo Hallgren, Swedish Patent Office

Dear Bo,

Does the Swedish gov. patent office recognize a
catagory of IP ownership called "adoption"?

Ron Davis
watermotor.net


"Basically, the spoons are orphans that Peter found and
we adopted".

November 7, 2002

At 13:33 02/10/30 -0700, you wrote:
Hi Ron,
I look forward to your dyno data. The only good
numbers I have
are for the combination of turbine and generator
being 50%
efficient using a 1/3 hp DC brush type motor and a
9/32" nozzle
with about 50' of head. These aren't really ideal
conditions.
The motor was much larger than needed for the output.
The
nozzle much smaller than ideal for the blue spoons.
I'd really
like to see numbers with something like a 1/2" nozzle
and
a direct measurement on the turbine rather than
electric output.

I'll look at the return address on the spoon mailers
for an
address for Ingela Carlsson. Peter said she is about
2 hrs north
of him "in the woods". I have a postcard note from
her that
came in one of the shipments here in my briefcase,
but it
doesn't have an address. I asked Peter if she had any
design
info, or the injection molding die, or test data,
etc. He has asked
and she doesn't. Her husband died something like 10
years before
Peter met her. She and her sons don't want to have
anything
to do with it as they blame his heart attack on his
hydro obsession.
Basically, the spoons are orphans that Peter found and
we adopted.

Joe

Ruyter: "..this on-going terrorist act in the turbine world" .Feb. 27, 08

Yahoo! Mail

Re: Hartvigsen and Ruyter's Turgo Design Ownership Scam
Wednesday, February 27, 2008 3:32 AM
From:
"Sara Pettersson Ruyter"
View contact details
To:
"davis ron"
Cc:
hq@cargo-kraft.se
To Ron Davies and whomever it might concern:

As being the COB and representatives of the owners of Cargo & Kraft Turbin Sweden AB, I hereby would like to put an end to this on-going terrorist act in the turbine world.

Mrs. Carlsson is very much a living person, being the widow of the swedish inventor of the discussed turgo desgin. We met the first time about 8 years ago and began discussions about what to do with her heritage after her husband. Later Mrs Carlson decided to sell the inventories, stock and knowledge to CKTAB. This has been proven to, by Mr. R Davies mentioned investigators among others, in Sweden and leaving them in full trust of the rightness of CKTAB in this case.

Due to introduced personality of Mr. R. Davies, we have chosen to keep Mrs. I Carlson out of this debacle. She, being a lady of plus 70, with poor knowledge of foregin languages.

CKTAB began working together with Mr J Hartivgsen many years ago. Mr Peter Ruyter and Mr Joe Hartvigsen are fullyrepsonible for all action taken and we are truly impressed by the handling of this case.

We urge Mr Ron Davies will stop terrorising whomever he thinks will have interest in his invented story. Truth is; he bought plastic spoons from us, copied them in metal and sold them as his invention. Don´t bring this story back to the 16th century, this is reality, today.

Short version is; STOP this e-mail bombing of people, institutions and departments not being interested in Mr Davies fraud.
We have all better things to do.

Sincerely,
Mrs S Pettersson
peter ruyter sweden libel cargo and kraft turgo turbine joseph hartvigsen hydro h-hydro extortion fraud internet fraud water power watermotor ingela carlson scam

Monday, September 6, 2010

Peter Ruyter's Invitation to Sweden, Sept 4, 2010

Flag this message
Visit to Sweden
Saturday, September 4, 2010 2:46 AM
From:
"Peter Ruyter"
Add sender to Contacts
To:
"davis ron"
Ron,
we are back from the boatingtripp in arcipelagor now ,and I say as I says for years ago, over and over again, you are welcome to visit us and together we will visit Carlson and read our companybooks. That is same as I have told all funny guys you have leaded to me. At the nearest time I have to go to hospital for a minor recovery operation.o and k
This is direct from me to you.o and k

PR


Hartvigsen: the only way to get past this is.....for use (you) to fly you to Sweden, August 31, 2010

Re: I'm still planning to get back to you after relaying your request to Peter for a formal and public invitation listing what you will see when you visit him.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010 12:26 PM
From:
"Joseph Hartvigsen"
View contact details
To:
"davis ron"
Cc:
"Peter Ruyter"
Ron,
Why don't you publish all of your private business details? Obviously because
they

are not really anyone else's business. Since you are making a stink about this
Peter
is willing to open the record of a private business transaction and show you,
but he is not (and no one else would either) going to give you a copy. You can
see the transaction documents and you can meet Ingella and see original
documents regarding the design and production of the spoons, but you don't
get to keep them. They don't belong to you. That is the only way you are going
to see them.

Any reasonable person including Brian would follow the logic I've stated and
re-stated.
The spoons exist. Therefore they were created and the creator owns the copyright
as described in circ01.pdf from copyright.gov The copyright is valid for the
life of
the creator plus 70 years (or some such number). It is real property that be
inherited
(hence Ingella's ownership when this all started), and sold (hence Peter's
current
ownership). All of these are provable, but they are all also private documents.
Again,
to a rational person, you would not need to make the trip to Sweden to accept
this.
But you are clearly irrational, so the only way to get past this and leave us
alone
is for use to fly you to Sweden and host you there and show you.

And, as I've told you about the meeting with Brian, he wasn't interested in
anything
related to the existence of Ingella. He didn't dispute the existence of the
copyright,
or its original ownership by Mr. Carlson, and its transfer to Ingella and then
to Peter.
His position was that it was moot because of the application of copyright to
functional
aspects of design.

Joe


----- Original Message ----
From: davis ron
To: Joseph Hartvigsen
Sent: Tue, August 31, 2010 9:15:55 AM
Subject: I'm still planning to get back to you after relaying your request to
Peter for a formal and public invitation listing what you will see when you
visit him.

Joe,

Why didn't you and Ruyter present the proof of design ownership you claim to
have to patent attorney Brian Kunzler on Dec.23, 09, as you said you would a
number of times?

Ron Davis

Friday, September 3, 2010

Ron Davis: Can you prove to the group that my Turbine runners are illegal? March 5, 09

Original text with member´s comments can be seen at:
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/microhydro/message/10877?l=1

Re: SPOONS AND TURBINES--proof of illegality?


--- In microhydro@yahoogroups.com, Otto Rike (Ron Davis) wrote:
>
> Dr. Hartvigsen,
>
> Can you prove to the group that my Turbine runners are illegal?
>
> Ron Davis

Ron,


Your question is easy. Yes! There are only two parts to the proof.

1. Did you copy the spoons?
2. Do you own the copyright?

The answers are yes, you copied the spoons, and no you do not own
the copyright, nor do you have permission from the copyright owner
to make copies. Therefore your copies are illegal. At this time it
is owned by Cargo & Kraft AB of Sweden.

Below is an email exchange from seven years ago between you and
Peter (Cargo & Kraft) where you admit to copying the spoons and
Peter has objected to your copying activities.

Following that are two emails I've sent you in response to similar
demands to this posting outlining the facts surrounding both #1 and
#2.

There is absolutely nothing new here. You admit that your product is
a copy of the parts which design is owned by Peter. He has not ever
agreed to allow you to copy these parts. You have the links to the
law. What part of this don't you understand? The second email below
has a quiz in which I've invited you to identify which aspect you do
not understand. The invitation still stands.


Joe


Date: Sat, 04 May 2002 07:29:45 -0400
To: Peter Ruyter , jjh@...,
From: Ron & Diane
Subject: Re: turbinetest

Peter,
We had some sort misunderstanding. Did you not realize Joseph was
selling the spoons one at a time? I bought four.And in my
communications I ALWAYS told people where I got them and
recommended them. As you could see, I was promoting your product!
Check out my e-mails.
As to the product itself--you were selling a product on which you
self- admittedly had no data. Do you have data now? Have you tested
your own product?
We just didn't understand what the problem was. You didn't write to
clear things up after Diane wrote to you.
I was pretty upset. I really don't like being accused of wrongdoing!
I don't think Joseph thought he was doing anything wrong either, or
he wouldn't have been selling the spoons in partial sets.
I was very clear to him that I was going to use them to make bronze
spoons.
I'm sure he must have told you.
So lets clear this matter up so we can work together. O.K?

Ron-----P.S. I couldn't read your attachment. It just came up code.

At 23:21 00/09/12 +0200, you wrote:
Evening Ron and Diane.
I am a little bit sad, because you not answering my mails.
And when I understand you are using my work and make copies of our
products. Its very sad, and its a backslash for whole area of intrest
for spending time, love and money for developing good working hydro
products with small economical frames.
I look for a good explanation and I hope to come in mode for spending
more power to develop better things and more power to poor peoples.
Peter

----------

From my email to you on Wednesday, November 8, 2006 (note that 75
years is incorrect, it is only 70 years)


With regards to proof of your copyright violation, you have admitted
that you made copies using the plastic original to make a wax mold
for the castings you make and show on your web site. The web page I
gave you on copyright of an "original expression fixed in a tangible
medium", i.e. a tangible artifact, states that the copyright is in
effect without filing for the life of the creator plus 75 years.

Let's follow the logic here.
1. The spoons exist, therefore someone created them and they are
automatically copyright.
2. You copied them, thereby violating the copyright.
3. I received the spoons from two sources, directly from Peter Ruyter
and directly from Ingella Carlsson at the request of Peter Ruyter.
4. I have been told that Ingella's late husband was their creator,
and that he has been dead 10-15 years. Therefore, there is at least
60 years of copyright protection remaining.
5. My source for the spoons requested that I collect $2/copy of the spoons.
6. I passed that request on to you.
7. There are no other sources of the spoons, nor any other claims as
creator or copyright holder, therefore one can safely assume that this
claim is valid.

In the future please send all payments directly to Peter. If you feel
it would be more appropriate to send payment to Ingella I'm sure he
would prefer that over the current situation. Work out the details of
payment with Peter and I'm sure the needed update of the record could
be made on the microhydro group. His contact information is found at
http://www.microhydro.com/english.html


------------

From my email to you Saturday, June 2, 2007

Ron,
Given the subject lines of your last two emails,
"Dr. Hartvigsen---more than your word as a Mormon-PUBLIC QUESTION!"
and,
"I guess that means the answer is NO!"
I can only assume that you are having difficulty grasping the simple
concepts that I've outlined in great detail for you.

So, here is a true or false quiz for you. I'll give you a hint, all
the answers are true, but if you still have some trouble with it
please tell me which question you have difficulty in answering true.
Then I will be happy to address that question in further detail.

Q1 The blue and orange turgo spoons exist.
Q2 These turgo spoons were created by someone.
Q3 These turgo spoons were not created by Ron or Joe.
Q4 These turgo spoons were created by someone who is either alive or
has been dead for less than 70 years (hint - injection molded glass
filled nylon is less than 50 years old).
Q5 US and International copyright law automatically covers the spoon
design without filing any paperwork, for the lifetime of the creator,
and prohibits unauthorized copies, with provisions for civil and
criminal penalties for violations. (Hint, review the URLs I provided
to copyright.gov for complete details)
Q6 Joseph Hartvigsen was supplied turgo spoons from the copyright
owner (the creator's estate or later the purchaser from the creator's
estate)
Q7 Joseph Hartvigsen sold Ron Davis turgo spoons and paid the entire
sales price to his spoon supplier (i.e. at no profit).
Q8 Ron Davis made un-authorized replicas of the orange turgo spoon.
Q9 Joseph Hartvigsen reported this activity to the spoon supplier.
Q10 The spoon supplier requested that Ron pay $2/copy to the legal copyright
holder.
Q11 Ron refused to comply with this request.

Need I go any further? Again, tell me which question you can't
clearly answer true? What is the obvious conclusion?

Joe

Thursday, September 2, 2010

Corruption, American Style: J. Hartvigsen to B. Kunzler Feb. 22, 2010

Wed, July 14, 2010 8:53:22 PM
Fw: Fwd: Fw: Corruption, American Style:
...
From:
Joseph Hartvigsen
...
View Contact
To: Ron Davis
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Joseph Hartvigsen
To: Brian Kunzler
Sent: Mon, February 22, 2010 5:42:41 PM
Subject: Fwd: Fw: Corruption, American Style

Brian,
Your client Ron Davis is firing off the message below to anyone he thinks might be swayed to his side - including trying to post this in online forums. It contains your private message to him and my private message to him. It also contains false accusations about me. I don't know where this falls in the defamation/slander/libel spectrum but it goes far beyond anything I've put out there about Ron. Realistically, I know he is beyond the reach of the law living in Bolivia and not having anything worth going after.

There are 3 primary issues besides that of copying, which while they are technically irrelevant are used by Ron to justify his premise that everything I've ever told him is a lie. These 3 accusations are easily refuted. I will cooperate with you in efforts to prove these issues are as I've always stated.

1. Ingella Carlson
You have seen and handled a handwritten and signed note that came with spoons she sent me. I also have a scanned image of this note with the return address of the package delivered from Sweden. The spoon obviously came in the mail from Sweden with that return address. I have no other contact from her and have never met her, but Peter had and I've met Peter. I have no reason to doubt this. I can come to your office and show it to you again but I will not leave the address as I will not risk Ron getting it and starting his barrage of harassment on Ingella Carlson.

2. Bishop Rees
You can ask Rand Bateman if his sister Dana's husband Robert Holmes Rees is an attorney with the state legislature and if he served as LDS Bishop in the Highlands Ward in Kaysville for some 6 years up to about two years ago.

3. Ceramatec
I gathered from your conversation with me that you had already spoken with both David Fonda and Loren Hulse about Ron's claims that I had withheld information about Ron being the original inventor of FiberSil and emails relating to this project from Ron. Both David and Loren should know enough of the history to refute that claim. Ron's issue was that the proposal Ceramatec offered was to prepare and submit the patent and include Ceramatec co-inventors, who while clearly not the original inventor had done development work that increased understanding and reduction to practice that expanded the breadth and created additional claims to the invention. He never grasped the concept of co-inventors on the combined results of his original idea and Ceramatec's expansion of it.

Regarding this comment:
We did discuss whether he had any proprietary rights to the design. He seemed to believe he did. I explained the law to him, and at least lessened his conviction, if not totally changing his mind. Because copyright does not cover functional designs, the Widow’s existence is not important to your right to sell the design. It might have bearing on a defamation case because he had to know the statements he was making were false in order for you to prevail in such a suit.

After our conversation before Christmas I followed your suggestion to read on wikipedia and copyrights.gov related to functional aspects of a design, I found the following beyond the circ01.pdf from copyrights.gov that I had referred Ron to in support of my understanding of the mater (some of the wiki content has since changed).

This is the main link of interest pertaining to the question.
http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl103.html
This also has some relevant discussion in the section on "Copyrightable" (last paragraph - content no longer there)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright#.22Copyrightable.22_as_a_word
Basically confirming your claim that the functionally dictated aspects are not protected by copyright,
and even a design patent doesn't really help with the functional aspect of the specific profile
of a functional item.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_patent#Comparison_to_utility_patents

However, I have also read and I don't have the citation at hand that in some countries (Britain ? ) not only can a mechanical drawing be copyright, but the copyright protection also extends to using the drawing to make the article shown in the copyright drawing or blueprint. If the drawing can't be used to make the article, then the use of the article (which is intrinsically and automatically copyright) directly as the mold form should also be prohibited. This is not the case in the US apparently.

So there seems to be a grey area which while it might be difficult to enforce copyright as protection, it would also be difficult to show (in conjunction with circ01) that there are no aspects of the copyright that were being violated (i.e. claims of copyright protection being 100% without basis). It is all too technical for me and I don't have any interest (and never did) in pursuing it. The only reason is was ever brought up beyond myself, Peter and Ron is that Ron dragged it out in every forum he could because he thinks I am a liar and a cheat - and he says so to everyone he can.

So, here is my offer. I will post an email message stating my corrected understanding of the limited protection of copyright to this circumstance and that due to my mistake in not requiring a non-copy condition of sale I don't have any power to prohibit Ron from making copies of the original orange plastic spoon.

In turn Ron will post an email retracting all of his false accusations against me and Peter. In particular, admitting that 1) I was not fraudulently trying to rip him off in this matter because Peter and I had a reasonable belief there was some protection based on copyright, 2) Ingella Carlson and Bishop Rees are who we said they were, 3) I did not withhold any information regarding his invention from my employer, 4) had I had the foresight to require a non-copy agreement as a condition of sale he would have been prohibited from making copies contractually and 5) that it was Ron, using phony email addresses that dragged this whole thing out in public to start with.

I don't believe Ron will accept this solution because he is more interested in telling everyone that I am a liar, fraud and cheat than he is in building turbines.

If he does agree to settle this matter, I am prepared to offer him some extremely generous terms on supply of spoons. However, the terms must be considered business proprietary and covered by a non-disclosure agreement as well as with a non-copy condition of sale on any of the new spoon types.

Regards,

Joe

Joseph Hartvigsen
Hartvigsen-Hydro
1529 South 400 East
Kaysville, UT 84037 USA

Micro Hydro components, turgo runners
http://h-hydro.com


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: davis ron
Date: Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 8:08 PM
Subject: Fw: Corruption, American Style
To: idaminer@live.com, idaminer40@yahoo.com, nwgpa@yahoo.com, kenhhall@earthlink.net, bo.hallgren@prv.se, rhansen@uc.usbr.gov, ginnee@gmail.com, fhiebert@ngs.org, ahiler@mac.com, areca@ix.netcom.com, lrhulse@stoel.com, april.m.howard@gmail.com, rusnris@gmail.com, yljjamin@ucalgary.ca, renegademasterben@gmail.com, mjeschke@gmail.com, mkeene@ceramatec.com, wim_klunne@yahoo.com, david@chancho.org, danny.krause@hotmail.co.uk, liljrnys@sbcglobal.net, natasha@organictrader.com.au, clewinsohn@ceramatec.com, diegomatte@gmail.com, bobmagi@att.net, anandagopal3@gmail.com, mmeyer1900@yahoo.com, rrmcgovern@aol.com, reynade24@yahoo.com, melaniekat007@yahoo.com, bioassay@yahoo.com, stellan@umich.edu, gracielaneira@yahoo.es, garynoeske@hotmail.com, eduardopareja@yahoo.es, protzen@socrates.berkeley.edu, marc_piolenc@piolenc.bayandsl.ph, brian@colosa.com




--- On Fri, 2/19/10, davis ron wrote:


From: davis ron
Subject: Fw: Corruption, American Style
To: idaminer@live.com, idaminer40@yahoo.com, nwgpa@yahoo.com, kenhhall@earthlink.net, bo.hallgren@prv.se, rhansen@uc.usbr.gov, ginnee@gmail.com, fhiebert@ngs.org, ahiler@mac.com, areca@ix.netcom.com, lrhulse@stoel.com, april.m.howard@gmail.com, rusnris@gmail.com, yljjamin@ucalgary.ca, renegademasterben@gmail.com, mjeschke@gmail.com, mkeene@ceramatec.com, wim_klunne@yahoo.com, david@chancho.org, danny.krause@hotmail.co.uk, liljrnys@sbcglobal.net, natasha@organictrader.com.au, clewinsohn@ceramatec.com, diegomatte@gmail.com, bobmagi@att.net, anandagopal3@gmail.com, mmeyer1900@yahoo.com, rrmcgovern@aol.com, reynade24@yahoo.com, melaniekat007@yahoo.com, bioassay@yahoo.com, stellan@umich.edu, gracielaneira@yahoo.es, garynoeske@hotmail.com, eduardopareja@yahoo.es, protzen@socrates.berkeley.edu, marc_piolenc@piolenc.bayandsl.ph, brian@colosa.com
Date: Friday, February 19, 2010, 9:03 PM




--- On Fri, 2/19/10, davis ron wrote:


From: davis ron
Subject: Corruption, American Style
To: liljrnys@sbcglobal.net
Date: Friday, February 19, 2010, 7:48 PM



--- On Fri, 2/19/10, Brian Kunzler wrote:


From: Brian Kunzler
Subject: RE: Hartvigsen's latest message about you.
To: "davis ron"
Date: Friday, February 19, 2010, 4:17 PM

Ron,



I do not recall that Mr. Hartvigsen presented conclusive evidence of the Widow’s existence. Again, legally, it is of no consequence, so I did not pursue that aspect of the conversation very far. Unfortunately, I didn’t take extensive notes of the conversation.



We did discuss whether he had any proprietary rights to the design. He seemed to believe he did. I explained the law to him, and at least lessened his conviction, if not totally changing his mind. Because copyright does not cover functional designs, the Widow’s existence is not important to your right to sell the design. It might have bearing on a defamation case because he had to know the statements he was making were false in order for you to prevail in such a suit.



Otherwise, our discussion was just regarding the history of his dealings with you. I think I have already explained to you what stuck out from those discussions.



Please keep in mind that anything I report from the conversation would not be admissible in a defamation case as it would be hearsay.



I am not sure what consequence it has whether Robert Rees is a mormon bishop or not. I can see how his statements regarding your lack or right to sell the design could have cost you business and therefore might be part of a law suit (though you will have to prove the loss of business to get any damages) but I don’t see how the religion aspect comes into play.



I don’t think I said that I can prove he is or is not a bishop, but it would be very easy to find out. I would just have to go to the neighborhood and ask around a bit. My guess is that he is. Mormon bishops are quite common, it is a lay position, unlike in other religions. It does not carry all that much weight either, which is why I do not see why he would lie about it, or what you have to gain by following up on it.



I don’t recall stating David Fonda had not advised Hartvigsen that the copyright applied or not. Please keep in mind that my conversations with David and Joe will not be admissible in court.



I have not communicated with Harvigsen except at our lunch meeting and emails to set it up.



Regarding defamation, it is not actually my area of specialty. I can tell you that a successful suit could easily cost you $50,000 to $100,000. Usually you can get an injunction also, but he has already agreed verbally to cease from telling people you have cannot legally produce the turgo product. If you can prove that you have lost over that much in profit, not total sales, the case may be worth bringing. If he can prove the existence of the widow, then he may have a successful defense if the court buys the fact that he believed that copyright law applied.



Again, it is not my specialty, but I don’t see the basis for a criminal case of defamation.



Regarding the retraction of the fraudulent claims on the Internet, that is where you may want to use the threat of a suit for defamation or even better, intentional interference with a business relationship. Threat of such a suit could cause him to be more willing to make a public retraction.



If you would like me to prepare a letter to him asking for such a public retraction, I would be glad to do so. Please keep in mind that your retainer paid for two hours of my time. At this point, with my meetings with him and communications with you, I have exceeded that amount of time. To do such a letter, I would need a retainer for another half hour of time, which would be $140.



Best regards,



Brian







Brian C. Kunzler

Kunzler Needham Massey & Thorpe

8 East Broadway, Suite 600

Salt Lake City, Utah 84111

(O): 801-994-4646 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting              801-994-4646      end_of_the_skype_highlighting begin_of_the_skype_highlighting              801-994-4646      end_of_the_skype_highlighting

(F): 801-531-1929



kunzler@kmiplaw.com



The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the designated recipients named above. This message may be an attorney-client communication, and as such is privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error, and that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone and return the original message and all copies thereof to us by mail at our expense.



From: davis ron [mailto:watermotor@yahoo.com]
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2010 12:38 PM
To: Brian Kunzler
Subject: Hartvigsen's latest message about you.



Brian,

No question after what he has done Hartvigsen wants to "drop the matter" before everyone finds out what a vicious con man he is, and how he uses serial lies to get people to cover up for him. I would be very careful of this guy if I were you.

Now, please reply to our questions this time.
We asked you for a clear account of the meeting with Hartvigsen regarding the public statements he has used over the last several years to destroy our Watermotor aid project here in Bolivia.
We never got that.
We need it right away for the defamation suit.

As you saw in Hartvigsen's most recently sent messages to me, which he also sent to you, he is again claiming that in the meeting with you of Dec. 23, 09 he presented proof to you of the existence of the the widow Ingella (or Ingela) Carlson (or Carllson), from whom he says his partner had purchased the turgo design rights.
(This fable is the basis of his entire IP claim re the turgo.)
It is not, as his friends say, irrelevant. It is the basis for our defamation suit, as well as criminal defamation prosecution.

You CLEARLY told me he had not presented anything to support any of his claims at that meeting. Is he calling you a liar?

It seems Hartvigsen is also claiming that somehow YOU can prove the Utah State Attorney Robert H. Rees was his Mormon bishop, as he told me.
You are aware that Rees was investigated for impersonating a Mormon bishop by the Summit County Sheriff's Dept.

You told me that the Ceramatec patent attorney, Dave Fonda, said that he had NOT advised Hartvigsen that copyright applied to the turgo design and nor was Hartvigsen correct in concealing my emails to Ceramatec regarding the testing of my invention FiberSil, and secretly making himself (Hart.) "co-inventor".
Now Hartvigsen is saying the opposite. What is the story here?
How have you responded to Hartvigsen? Please send us a copy of your response.


We have asked you about the cost of a defamation suit against Hartvigsen, and a cease and desist order.
You did not reply regarding either subject.
Why not?
(YOU brought up the possibility of a defamation suit in our first telephone conversation.)
We asked you how you thought he would do in court, having nothing to support his claim. You didn't answer this either.

We asked you about a getting retraction to his fraudulent claims on the Internet.
You did not reply.
Since he has been deliberately deceiving the public for years, don't you think that would be appropriate?

One more question: How do we have Hartvigsen charged with criminal defamation?

Best,
Ron Davis



--- On Thu, 2/18/10, Brian Kunzler wrote:


From: Brian Kunzler
Subject: RE: Brian Kunzler: NEW, Hartvigsen's Turgo Design Claims on Yahoo Microhydro egroup site
To: "davis ron"
Date: Thursday, February 18, 2010, 5:46 PM

Ron,



From my reading, what Joe is saying is that he is throwing in the towel. He is dropping the subject. He is all but conceding my point about him not having any rights -- not because of the widow -- but because there are no proprietary rights in the design, absent patents. It sounds like to me he wants to drop the matter, which is what I thought you wanted.



He appears to be agreeing to not make any more statement publicly on the matter. That should allow you to go forward with marketing your product.



Brian



Brian C. Kunzler

Kunzler Needham Massey & Thorpe

8 East Broadway, Suite 600

Salt Lake City, Utah 84111

(O): 801-994-4646

(F): 801-531-1929



kunzler@kmiplaw.com



The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the designated recipients named above. This message may be an attorney-client communication, and as such is privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error, and that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone and return the original message and all copies thereof to us by mail at our expense.



From: davis ron [mailto:watermotor@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2010 2:02 PM
To: Brian Kunzler
Subject: Brian Kunzler: NEW, Hartvigsen's Turgo Design Claims on Yahoo Microhydro egroup site



Brian,

This is mostly about you.
Now, once again, Hartvigsen is telling people that you, my attorney, are going to back up his scam. What do you have to say about this? Please get back us right away.
We are still waiting for your replies to several questions regarding Hartvigsen's statements about you we asked in our last email.
I also asked you about a cease and desist order some days ago. You did not reply.
Wouldn't that prevent him from making more false claims about you?
How about filing a defamation suit against Hartvigsen? How much does that cost?

Ron Davis

--- On Thu, 2/18/10, Joseph Hartvigsen wrote:


From: Joseph Hartvigsen
Subject: Re: Hartvigsen's Turgo Design Claims on Yahoo Microhydro egroup site
To: "davis ron"
Cc: "Brian Kunzler"
Date: Thursday, February 18, 2010, 12:55 AM

Ron,
What part of I want to drop the matter now just as I did 6-8 years ago do you not get?

How did I not take the meeting with Mr. Kunzler seriously?

I did show Mr. Kunzler a handwritten and signed note from Ingella Carlsson noting that she was sending spoons on behalf of Peter, but as Mr. Kunzler noted it is irrelevant given the view that the copyright, while it exists, apparently offers no protection against what you are doing. Bishop Robert H Rees has a brother inlaw who is also a patent attorney one floor away from the KNMT law firm. Again you are barking up the wrong tree.

My understanding from our discussion was that Mr. Kunzler did inquire of the current and past patent attorneys at Ceramatec, both of whom verified that I did not withhold or misrepresent that you are the original inventor of fibersil. The only issue there is that you didn't understand what a co-inventor is when there has been additional IP generated as there was in this case. In any case that project was dropped since you didn't like the offered terms. The only issue here is in your mind.

Your whole long list of supposed lies evaporate if they are checked out. I will still confidently affirm that I have not made any knowingly false or misleading statements to you or about you. My statements on the applicability of copyright, while based on the circ01.pdf file from copyright.gov and discussions with an attorney, were technically incorrect. In hind sight, other than not understanding the limits of protections afforded by copyright, my only mistake in all of this was trying to help you in the first place.

I see from your message below that you are sending our private email to a number of parties who are not involved in the matter, but you have not approached me directly or through your attorney to address any remaining issues. Do you want to drop this or do you want to keep dragging it out and about?

What do you want to see as a resolution of this dispute?

Joe



From: davis ron
To: jjh@ceramatec.com; joe@h-hydro.com; h-n-h7@msn.com
Sent: Wed, February 17, 2010 5:42:07 PM
Subject: Fw: Hartvigsen's Turgo Design Claims on Yahoo Microhydro egroup site



--- On Wed, 2/17/10, davis ron wrote:


From: davis ron
Subject: Fw: Hartvigsen's Turgo Design Claims on Yahoo Microhydro egroup site
To: jajgs@surewest.net
Date: Wednesday, February 17, 2010, 7:34 PM



--- On Wed, 2/17/10, Otto Rike wrote:


From: Otto Rike
Subject: Fw: Hartvigsen's Turgo Design Claims on Yahoo Microhydro egroup site
To: "ron davis"
Date: Wednesday, February 17, 2010, 7:31 PM



--- On Thu, 2/18/10, Otto Rike wrote:


From: Otto Rike
Subject: Hartvigsen's Turgo Design Claims on Yahoo Microhydro egroup site
To: michael_welch@sbcglobal.net
Date: Thursday, February 18, 2010, 12:07 AM

And BYU patent lawyer's response

--- On Thu, 2/18/10, davis ron wrote:


From: davis ron
Subject: Fw: Hartvigsen's Turgo Design Claims on Yahoo Microhydro egroup site
To: ottorike@yahoo.com
Date: Thursday, February 18, 2010, 12:01 AM



--- On Wed, 2/17/10, davis ron wrote:


From: davis ron
Subject: Hartvigsen's Turgo Design Claims on Yahoo Microhydro egroup site
To: jay15661@yahoo.com
Date: Wednesday, February 17, 2010, 6:52 PM

Hartvigsen to Yahoo e-group Feb. 28 09, photos of my "inferior" turbines
These have clearly been damaged

http://notepad.mail.yahoo.com/YYY,e87b30/srt,0/?v=161&i=198&SW=&PSW=&POS=0&CID=0

Open letter to Yahoo microhydropower e-group list owner Wim Klunne March 10, 09

http://www.opensubscriber.com/message/microhydro@yahoogroups.com/11642111.html

Hartvigsen's March 11, 09 response to "Open letter to Wim Klunne" from Ron Davis
Klunne himself did not respond.

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/microhydro/message/10930

Klunne March 11, 09 Closing discussion on turgo design without allowing me to reply

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/microhydro/message/10933


Most recently:

The meeting between Joseph Hartvigsen and our attorney Brian Kunzler took place on Dec. 23, 09.

Wednesday, February 10, 2010 8:00 PM
re: Meeting With Joseph Hartvigsen

From:
"Brian Kunzler"
To:
"davis ron"

Ron,

I just found out that your emails were being sent to my junk folder. I get them on my phone, but not my computer. That is why my responses to have been sporadic. I have fixed that.
In my meeting with Mr. Hartvigsen, I explained that the existence of the widow was of no consequence, as they have no proprietary rights absent patents, which they do not hold. Even if they did, they would have to hold them in the all countries they are trying to preclude sales in. He did not establish her existence, nor did I see a license agreement. Again, both are irrelevant. Copyright law does not cover what they are doing. He agreed to let it drop if you would. If he continues to cause you a loss of business by claiming a proprietary right that does not exist, he is committing a business tort and is opening himself up to a law suit.

Best regards,

Brian

Brian C. Kunzler

Kunzler Needham Massey & Thorpe

8 East Broadway, Suite 600

Salt Lake City, Utah 84111

(O): 801-994-4646

(F): 801-531-1929

kunzler@kmiplaw.com


From: davis ron [mailto:watermotor@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 10:43 AM
To: Brian Kunzler
Subject: Meeting With Joseph Hartvigsen

Hello Brian,

I have a Watermotor turbine ready to ship to the U.S.
The day before yesterday I asked Joseph Hartvigsen a straightforward question:

" Are you still claiming my turbines are "illegal" copies and that you could have them banned from the U.S by U.S. Customs?"

You saw his reply, which he sent to you as well. I am sorry to say that it seems that Hartvigsen did not take the meeting with you very seriously.

We are awaiting a report on your meeting with Joseph Hartvigsen which was to allow you to evaluate his IP claims regarding the turgo turbine runner design we use.
Hartvigsen said he would be able show you whatever evidence he would present in court to support his claims regarding turgo design ownership.
And what he would present to the U.S. customs Service as proof that my turgo runners were "illegal" copies, as he has publicly claimed, and which he has threatened to have seized.

He said he would also explain why, as a scientific professional with special training in understanding IP regulations, he has publicly maintained for years that COPYRIGHT protection was applicable to his turgo design ownership claims.
As you see, he is now trying to claim ignorance of basic IP rules as an excuse, making no mention of the damage his false claims have done.
He was to explain why he could publicly demand royalty payments from me when there was no royalty agreement.

Did he explain why neither he nor Peter Ruyter could prove any aspect of the widow Carlson story, upon which their entire turgo design ownership claim is based, to be factual. Could they even provide the NAME of the supposed inventor?

Did you discuss the public retraction of his public statements, made for years, that my turbines are illegal?
Did you inform him that he could expect to be held responsible for the damage he has done with his fraudulent and libelous public statements?

What was his response?

So, very importantly, as an attorney, please tell us how do you think Hartvigsen's story would stand up in court?

He also said he would explain concealing my business corresponance to his company Ceramatec regarding the testing of my invention FiberSil from the company records, and having secretly made himself co-inventor.
This would include his statement, as you saw, made to me and others that the Ceramatec patent attorney supported his claim that copyright protection was applicable to the turgo design and that he had the right to secretly claim to have co-invented my invention FiberSil, which Hartvigsen was in charge of testing.
Did you ask him who else at Ceramatec knew he was doing this?
Ashok Joshi, for an example?
( Hartvigsen said that he handed Joshi the 67 emails from me he had been concealing.)

Brian,
We need to know what Hartvigsen means by these statements regarding his meeting with you a month ago:

" I think Brian can confirm the existence of Bishop Robert Rees, and that I am not making up Mrs. Ingela Carlsson either. I think the only finding in your favor out of our discussions is that I had an incorrect understanding of the strength of protection afforded by copyright."

Did you, as my attorney, actually agree to tell anyone you examined widow Carlson fable and found it to be true?
You certainly didn't tell me any such thing.

Did he prove to you that State Attorney Robert Rees actually was his Mormon bishop as he claimed Rees was when he wrote to me, and why the LDS church refused to confirm this claim? If so why was Rees unable to prove this to the Summit County Sheriff's Dept when he was investigated for impersonating a bishop?

Do you agree with this statement, as he implies, that the false IP claims he has used for years to destroy our Watermotor project, and my reputation was a result of a minor misunderstanding of intellectual property laws, of which he was not informed, and for which he should not expect to be held responsible?

Hartvigsen seems to be speaking on your behalf here. You must realize he has sent this message out to other people.
Please let me know right away what you intend to do about this.

As I have mentioned to you before, for years whenever anyone actually asks Hartvigsen for proof of his IP claims he doesn't provide it, since it does not exist, but rather makes some extremely defamatory statements about me personally to cover for his fraud.
I can show you several public and private examples in which this type of information from Hartvigsen is referred to.
Did you ask him about this? What did he say?
You told me that as my attorney when you learned the nature of these statements you would inform me about them.

Brian,
Next Monday we are meeting with three vice-ministers in the Bolivian Government regarding the Watermotor project.
We will also meet with the new Director of the Patent Office.( I think I mentioned that I hold more patents on machines than anyone else in Bolivia).
If this matter is not resolved we will request that they inquire into Hartvigsen's threats to have my turbines banned from the U.S. as a trade issue.
These is no reason why this matter should not have already been resolved.

If you have any reason whatsoever to question the veracity of ANY of my statements or doubt the falsity of ANY of Hartvigsen's claims, please let me know.

Best, Ron

--- On Sat, 1/30/10, Joseph Hartvigsen wrote:


From: Joseph Hartvigsen
Subject: Re: spoon copying
To: "davis ron"
Cc: "Brian Kunzler"
Date: Saturday, January 30, 2010, 6:54 PM

Ron,
I met with your Attorney Brian Kunzler just before Christmas. Brian offered a different view of the applicability of copyright protection than I had been advised when I discussed this with an IP attorney several years ago. His view also differed from what I understood having read the circ01.pdf file I'd referred you to on copyrights.gov Further reading suggested by Brian confirmed his assertion that any functional aspects are not protected by copyright. However, the reading did seem to indicate that there is always the potential that some applicability of copyright could be claimed, particularly since you have not reverse engineered something similar, but actually used the spoon as the form to make a mold for your copies.

I told Brian that "I am willing to agree to disagree privately and to drop the matter publicly." which ironically is where we were 6-8 years ago before you kept bringing this up. I also stated that I cannot concede any point on Peter's behalf, and that I believe that Peter has purchased the copyright from Mrs. Ingela Carlsson or at least secured agreement to use it. The protection offered by this copyright may be very weak, but as I understand it its existence is as undeniable as the existence of the spoons.

So where does that leave us regarding the orange spoons? Basically it is where we were before all of the discussion where you were copying and I, having relayed Peter's displeasure in the practice and having been unsuccessful in negotiating any sort of arrangement, had dropped the mater.

In the mean time I have spent a great deal of time designing a range of new spoon sizes with various design improvements. I have spent tens of thousands of dollars on molds, some of which have been reworked after testing the parts. Having been down this painful road once, I have no interest in starting over with this issue. I don't think it is reasonable that I should invest so much time, thought and money in new products only to enable you to short circuit the process by buying one part to use as a form for making copies. Therefore, if you wish to use any of these new products, such as the greenspoon (150mm pcd with 240 spoons, elliptical or cyl/hemi contours) I will require a signed agreement that you will not copy or enable others to do so as a precondition of sale. I don't expect that you will be interested in such an arrangement, but those will be the terms going forward.

I think Brian can confirm the existence of Bishop Robert Rees, and that I am not making up Mrs. Ingela Carlsson either. I think the only finding in your favor out of our discussions is that I had an incorrect understanding of the strength of protection afforded by copyright. I had already told you repeatedly of my desire to drop the matter.

So what do you want to do at this point?

Joe



Joseph Hartvigsen
Hartvigsen-Hydro
1529 South 400 East
Kaysville, UT 84037 USA

Micro Hydro components, turgo runners
http://h-hydro.com



From: davis ron
To: jjh@ceramatec.com; h-n-h7@msn.com; joe@h-hydro.com
Sent: Sat, January 30, 2010 3:56:29 PM
Subject:

Hartvigsen,

Are you still claiming my turbines are "illegal" copies and that you could have them banned from the U.S by U.S. Customs?

Ron Davis,
Watermotor@yahoo.com












brian kunzler joseph hartvigsen bishop robert h.rees ron davis sweden rand bateman loren hulse david fonda ceramatec fibersil ceramatec swedish patent office fraud