Looks like he has the patent approved by the Italians, from what it appears the EU will follow, likely at least. Here is a on-going discussion:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Energy_Catalyzer#Italian_patent
"Italian patentIMHO this is a remarkable information: the Ufficio Italiano Brevetti e Marchi (Italian Office for Patents and Trademarks) has licenced the patent for the Energy Catalyzer:
http://www.uibm.gov.it/uibm/dati/Av..._uno&id=1610895&table=Invention&#ancoraSearch
Ufficio italiano brevetti e marchi,
TITLE: "processo ed apparecchiatura per ottenere reazioni esotermiche, in particolare da nickel ed idrogeno."
(TRANSLATION: "process and equipment to obtain exothermal reactions, in particular from nickel and hydrogen")
N. Brevetto 0001387256
Data Deposito: 09 aprile 2008,
Data Brevetto 06 aprile 2011,
Inventori: Andrea Rossi.
So, the date of the deposit is 9 April 2008 and the date of the licence (patent obtained) is 6 April 2011.--79.6.145.119 (talk) 08:43, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
I don't speak Italian, and Google Translate doesn't help here: can someone find a link to the patent text? It would be worth knowing exactly what it is that has been patented. It would also be worth looking for any reports in WP:RS regarding the granting of the patent, as the patent itself is a primary source, and Wikipedia should ideally cite secondary sources - without knowledge of Italian patent law, it is difficult to assess the significance of this. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:13, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
It seems that the abstract and the description for the italian patent are not publicly available yet, according to this page:
http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publ...ODOC&locale=en_EP&CC=IT&NR=MI20080629A1&KC=A1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.16.217.164 (talk) 14:20, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
Unless Italian patent law is rather unorthodox, I cannot see how a patent can have been granted without making public what it is that has been patented. Can we be sure that the patent actually has been granted, rather than the application for the patent? These are two different parts of the process, as I understand it. Again, without secondary sources, trying to make sense of this is difficult. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:34, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
I can give you a possible answer about this issue. The patent is so fresh (basically the "verdict" was published yesterday on the website) that usually it requires a "while" before publishing the content of the patent. How long does this process take? I do not know, but occasionally it takes a lot of time...
Comment: if the European patent is not approved then it is also possible that the Italian patent shall be "ovverruled" in the future by an unfavourable decision concerning the European patent. That is the reason why, even now, (ie after obtaining the Italian patent) Andrea Rossi cannot still "chant for victory" IMHO.--79.6.145.119 (talk) 14:46, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
According to someone I have consulted on this, there are no national patents in the EU now, which I think means the above scenario can't happen and the patent is secure. If anyone disagrees with this, perhaps they can indicate an RS?
Also, Re AtG's query as to why we can't see the details, I have come across a web page that says the details of the application are kept secret for a certain period, normally 18 months, which explains why we currently have only a general indication. --Brian Josephson (talk) 17:03, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
In any case, the granting of a patent is no indication that the 'Catalyzer' (a) works, or (b) is commercially viable if it does. This is all speculative though - again, please find sources. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:54, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
You got perfectly right: the only new thing we know now is that an Italian patent was guaranteed to Andrea Rossi, but this information alone is not an indication tha the E-Cat (a) works, or (b) is commercially viable if it does.--79.6.145.119 (talk) 14:59, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
Of course -- it is the experiments, which hardly fit our creative Editor's characterisation 'dog and pony show' which (IMO) indicate that it works. And if Rossi is telling the truth (which of course we can't yet assume), the E-cat is already in commercial use. --Brian Josephson (talk) 17:03, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
Now the patent is being referred to on Defkalion's website.
http://www.defkalion-energy.com/ 90.192.141.219 (talk) 20:03, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[4]"
also,
http://www.defkalion-energy.com/
The company that is supposedly going to be the manufacture also listing the patent on their new site. For what it's worth. Again, I am not advocating this is real yet, but the other shoe hasn't dropped.
Also, the patent doesn't mean it will do all it say's of course. But we aren't going to hear anymore about how it works from Rossi without it so maybe he will start to reveal more information.
I am still curious from others, aside from whether this is real or not, I still see this or another such device that is discovered as such a blow to the financial system in the short run that we would have to regulate it's impact such that it doesn't cause absolute chaos to the very system and persons it is supposed to help. Which is all those who have investments in stocks/bonds etc. Which is most of us.
If this is true and he just starts running with it, there are people who are going to be crapping their pants and jumping out of buildings.