Common Law is the Law of the People... Our American Common Law
SVP Web indexWhat’s New FAQ SVPbookstoreContact
Please visit the  SVPwiki
Of Course, There Aint No Conspiracy Virginia!
(or the Patent Secrecy Act)
by Dale Pond, 1/12/97 (copyright free - please distribute)

Recently it has been found out and demonstrated, through the diligent researches of other parties at (, that our basic rights to own our own property in the form of patents have been taken from us - yet again.

This issue is not news to those folks ardently pursuing their Constitutional Rights through the nationwide Common Law movement. But to the vast number of inventors, scientists and engineers (and their attorneys) out there this should be news indeed.

We are speaking of the United States Patent Law: Title 35, Part II, Chapter 17, Sections 181-188. This law was put in place in 1952. The URL of which is included at the end of this article.

This slick piece of legislation is a perfect example illustrative of how our property and rights to that property have been and are being denied to us by those very persons entrusted to protect them. To rub salt in this sore wound we will see how they not only deny us our property but how they can simply take it as though it were their property. Sound grim? Please read on. Just to get off to a good start read this excerpt from Section 181. paragraph 2:

"Whenever the publication or disclosure of an invention by the granting of a patent, in which the Government does not have a property interest, might, in the opinion of the Commissioner, be detrimental to the national security, he shall make the application for patent in which such invention is disclosed available for inspection to the Atomic Energy Commission, the Secretary of Defense, and the chief officer of any other department or agency of the Government designated by the President as a defense agency of the United States." (emphasis added)

In the same Section next paragraph we see the following:

"If, in the opinion of the Atomic Energy Commission, the Secretary of a Defense Department, or the chief officer of another department or agency so designated, the publication or disclosure of the invention by the granting of a patent therefor would be detrimental to the national security, the Atomic Energy Commission, the Secretary of a Defense Department, or such other chief officer shall notify the Commissioner and the Commissioner shall order that the invention be kept secret and shall withhold the grant of a patent for such period as the national interest requires..."

These state the grim story - if you know how to read their doublespeak legalese. So lets take a closer look at these seemingly innocent statements and see just what is being said here.

The telling word is opinion. Here is not due process of law nor judgments by a jury, nor assessments of a review board but simply an opinion of someone who was appointed or hired by someone else. They were not even elected to represent Us, We The People. They are appointed, by someone having some kind of vested interest from within the "Government."

Next we find the phrase detrimental to the national interest. This is real cute because it is so misleading especially to those innocent ones who believe everything they are told by anyone in authority.

What is the national interest? Who determines what is national interest? Why is there this determination done at all?

The nation is us, We The People, and has never been nor ever will be the "Government" who is simply our representative doing what we say we want done, when and as we say it. The "Government" is our agent acting in our behalf - it is not an entity of and to itself.

This nation of people is in truth made up of individuals - each pursuing his/her own happiness and life. So the nation is in fact the individuals making up its population and their rights. One of the major interests of the people is their rights to pursue their happiness as they see fit - not as a bureaucrat deems or opines it to be.

The nations interest is in fact the interests of each and every individual party to this nation.

On the other hand, the "Government" has been and is operating under a state of emergency since March, 1933. Under the provisions of our Constitution this State of Emergency can be declared by the President of the United States whenever he deems (in his opinion) the nations interest or security is threatened. He has done so beginning with Roosevelt and renewed every year since by every President. The result of this accumulated action is the Constitution and all of its guarantees to our rights, and the rights themselves, have been effectively suspended. In other words, "persons" and "individuals" do not have any rights excepting those tendered over by the "Government" acting through any of its officers or agents which occurs when we are acting under a State of Emergency. Details of this gruesome (but well researched) tale can be found at:

This assertion is demonstrated every time one goes into a court room and are subsequently denied any and all rights excepting those privileges granted by the so-called judge - acting as agent of the "Government" - solely performing under the Uniform Commercial Code but never under the Constitution or Common Law as expressed therein.

This is further emphasized in the document under consideration in Section 183 wherein a privilege is extended to the victim of this Title 35s theft of property allowing the rightful owner to sue for damages. We already have the "right to due process" and "trial by jury" as stipulated in our Constitution. There is no need to arbitrarily extend a new privilege in place of a right.

Getting back to the definition of national interest or national security we can now begin to see that this can be defined and is defined by the "Governments" officer or agent as expressly stated in the phrase in the opinion of which is part of the sentence quoted.

So for the application of this Title 35 and all of its thefts of personal and private property the national interest or national security is nothing more than the opinion of an appointed bureaucrat and nothing else!

The national interest or national security is whatever s/he says it is and any threats or detriments to those interests are also whatever s/he says they are. Law, decency, private property, Human Rights and our Constitution all take a back seat to this persons biased and influenced opinion.

So when it is ostentatiously put forth that this or that is done to preserve the nations interest you can bet your interests are not included unless you are among the elite working in or for the "Government.".

Moving right along in Section 182 we can see where the "Government" effects the actual theft of the property and the inventors rights to them by assuming claim over them if the inventor makes any effort to restore his rights if the invention has been published or disclosed or an application for a patent therefor has been filed in a foreign country. So if the inventor attempts to salvage his property the "Government" (but actually the interested, biased and appointed officer or agent) will declare the property as being abandoned even though the inventor is actively attempting to rescue or protect what is rightfully his!!!

This is one of the sly ways whereby a reverse psychology is used to accomplish ones nefarious purposes without being blamed for them. It is done by creating a scenario whereby the innocent is "setup" to be the bad guy even if he pursues his/her own lawful and Constitutional rights. In other words "if you do this you will be the wrong party and to blame for the consequences which you are forcing me to evoke."

This of course is how our Constitutional and Common Law rights have been and are being subverted and converted into crimes everyday.

Another piece of frosting on this cake is Section 187 wherein any officer or agent of the United States is not subject to this regulation. Can you believe this?

"The prohibitions and penalties of this chapter shall not apply to any officer or agent of the United States acting within the scope of his authority, nor to any person acting upon his written instructions or permission."

In other words all the prohibitions and penalties of this chapter do not apply to the privileged elite working for the "Government" but only to you and me! This no doubt accounts for why Ron Brown was reported to have had a patent on a life-form. He has this immunity from the law simply because he was somebodys friend and was appointed to a high elitist "Government" office. It is probably a patent you and I are denied to have - because some bureaucrat deemed (in his/her opinion) it dangerous and a threat to the national interests.

Imagine that any elitist and privileged officer or agent of the United States can go into the patent office and have these exotic and prohibited patents issued into his or her name but you, the inventor, cannot!! And if you protest or try to secure what used to be your right to your own property you will be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned for not more than two years.

All this illustrates what this writer has been saying for a long time. The Common Law and our Constitution are founded on and have their substance in property and property rights. The vile and vicious Equity Law (Admiralty Law) is founded and predicated on contracts, compelled performances and privileges. So here in this Title 35 we can see what can and is being done through and with the Equity extension of privileges to the select few while property and rights become nonexistent for the rest of us, We The people. Therefore let it be asserted in no uncertain terms:

There can be no Free Energy machines, New Energy devices or new and radical developments or inventions without the Common Law and our Constitution restored to their rightful place.

Gee, Virginia, how could anyone think there is a conspiracy to defraud innocent people of their rights is way beyond me. Neither can I understand why so many people are upset with their "Government."

The actual "law" can be found at the following URL as published under USC Title 35 Section 181

Invention Secrecy Still Going Strong

There were 5,135 inventions that were under secrecy orders at the end of Fiscal Year 2010, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office told Secrecy News last week.  It’s a 1% rise over the year before, and the highest total in more than a decade.

Under the Invention Secrecy Act of 1951, patent applications on new inventions can be subject to secrecy orders restricting their publication if government agencies believe that disclosure would be “detrimental to the national security.”

The current list of technology areas that is used to screen patent applications for possible restriction under the Invention Secrecy Act is not publicly available and has been denied under the Freedom of Information Act.  (An appeal is pending.)  But a previous list dated 1971 and obtained by researcher Michael Ravnitzky is available here (pdf).

Most of the listed technology areas are closely related to military applications.  But some of them range more widely.

Thus, the 1971 list indicates that patents for solar photovoltaic generators were subject to review and possible restriction if the photovoltaics were more than 20% efficient.  Energy conversion systems were likewise subject to review and possible restriction if they offered conversion efficiencies “in excess of 70-80%.”
One may fairly ask if disclosure of such technologies could really have been “detrimental to the national security,” or whether the opposite would be closer to the truth.  One may further ask what comparable advances in technology may be subject to restriction and non-disclosure today.  But no answers are forthcoming, and the invention secrecy system persists with no discernible external review.

References - More Reading Materials on Zoning & Property (Rights)
Modernization of Zoning - A Means to Reform
Property and Freedom - a book review
Property and Freedom, by Richard Pipes; Hardcover, 317pp., ISBN: 0375404988; Publisher: Knopf Alfred A; April 1999
Alliance for America
Citizens for Constitutional Property Rights
Defenders of Property Rights
Environmental Conservation Organization
Forest Service Theft of Property
National Association of Reversionary Property Owners
Law Research & Registry
Pennsylvania Landowners Association
Property Rights
Siskiyou County Farm Bureau
Take Back Arkansas
Common Law Course photo
SVP Web indexWhat’s New FAQSVPbookstore Contact
Please visit the  SVPwiki