Question: Clock Spring, L.P., and Wrapmaster, Inc., are highpressure gas pipeline repair companies. Clock Spring is the exclusive licensee of the '307 patent, which covers a method for repairing damaged high-pressure gas pipes. Clock Spring sued Wrapmaster for infringement; Wrapmaster defended by claiming that the '307 patent was invalid. Specifically, Wrapmaster claimed that a 1989 demonstration of the method by the named inventor was an invalidating public use because it occurred almost three years before the patent application was filed. In the demonstration, the repair method was performed in front of representatives of several gas transmission companies. These representatives were not told to keep the method confidential. In addition, the inventor did not control either the circumstances of or the personnel involved in the demonstration and did not use the findings from the demonstration to refine and perfect the invention. Clock Spring argued that the demonstration was an experimental use, not a public use. How should the court rule on Clock Spring's claim? What effect will this ruling have on the validity of the '307 patent?