If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(AlterNet)   Old and busted: Patenting things to get protection for your new invention. New and shiny: Patenting to prevent others from inventing things   (alternet.org) divider line 16
    More: Asinine, consumer protection, Industrial Revolutions, breast cancer genes, inventors, industrial revolution  
•       •       •

2483 clicks; posted to Geek » on 19 Apr 2014 at 5:06 PM (21 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



16 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-04-19 05:08:20 PM
I thought that was already a thing.
 
2014-04-19 05:21:28 PM
It's not new.  Some guy was scared of certain mad-science like things, and wanted to prevent such technology from being developed.   Assignee was to "The Dis Corperation" (get it?).  I guess he was scared by the movie

/found the patent, read the story years ago
//patent lapsed, let the mad science begin!  (thunder rolls)

patentimages.storage.googleapis.com


///probably was scared by below as a kid.
3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-04-19 05:37:43 PM

Vlad_the_Inaner: It's not new.  Some guy was scared of certain mad-science like things, and wanted to prevent such technology from being developed.   Assignee was to "The Dis Corperation" (get it?).  I guess he was scared by the movie

/found the patent, read the story years ago
//patent lapsed, let the mad science begin!  (thunder rolls)

[patentimages.storage.googleapis.com image 850x1248]


///probably was scared by below as a kid.
[3.bp.blogspot.com image 850x512]


I don't see a label for Neck Juice.
 
2014-04-19 05:38:17 PM
FTA: Intellectual property rights are supposed to help inventors bring good things to life,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_Bring_Good_Things_to_Life


The author probably thought this stealage was incredibly witty, or else she doesn't know the difference between tired cliché and advertising slogan.
 
2014-04-19 06:56:16 PM

Vlad_the_Inaner: It's not new.  Some guy was scared of certain mad-science like things, and wanted to prevent such technology from being developed.   Assignee was to "The Dis Corperation" (get it?).  I guess he was scared by the movie

/found the patent, read the story years ago
//patent lapsed, let the mad science begin!  (thunder rolls)

[patentimages.storage.googleapis.com image 850x1248]


///probably was scared by below as a kid.
[3.bp.blogspot.com image 850x512]



Patents only last twenty years at most, so stopping anyone else doing it would (a) not stop others doing it for private research etc and (b) only last twenty years.

The article is a bit misinformed and/or biased. Patents and Copyrights were designed to allow the creator to profit by having an exclusive period. That's the whole point. Otherwise why have patents at all? You invent something? Great. Start making it and sell as many as you can before all your competitors copy you.
It will cost millions to develop and you make something like a drug that has to be publicly disclosed before you start selling it so you competitors can reach the market the same day as you without having to spend those millions? Tough.

Result? No one will spend millions developing new drugs. Why would they if they can just be undercut by everyone else on day one?

Result? No new drugs.
 
2014-04-19 07:43:58 PM
Wasn't it "new HOTNESS"?

/and it isn't new anyway
//though nowadays is patent to sue later, not to stop anyone
 
2014-04-19 10:17:31 PM
I just got a patent for a $200 laser cutter. Being as it's my sixth-seventh invention, I know from experience that what that does is give you about a year before some guy in China or the Ukraine copies you. To sue, you have to travel to their country and promptly get beaten. Which is why provisional patents are a good thing.

http://igg.me/at/minilaser/
 
2014-04-19 11:37:28 PM
IBM has patented a certain process of obtaining patents.

Infringe at your own peril.
 
2014-04-19 11:47:40 PM

spiritplumber: I just got a patent for a $200 laser cutter. Being as it's my sixth-seventh invention, I know from experience that what that does is give you about a year before some guy in China or the Ukraine copies you. To sue, you have to travel to their country and promptly get beaten. Which is why provisional patents are a good thing.

http://igg.me/at/minilaser/


man, you need a better attorney
 
2014-04-20 01:22:39 AM

spiritplumber: I just got a patent for a $200 laser cutter. Being as it's my sixth-seventh invention, I know from experience that what that does is give you about a year before some guy in China or the Ukraine copies you. To sue, you have to travel to their country and promptly get beaten. Which is why provisional patents are a good thing.

http://igg.me/at/minilaser/


Clearly you're just a patent troll and stifling innovation.  I mean, now no one can make laser cutters ever again in the history of ever.

/What I've learned from Patent threads/articles
 
2014-04-20 08:25:24 AM

Flint Ironstag: Vlad_the_Inaner: It's not new.  Some guy was scared of certain mad-science like things, and wanted to prevent such technology from being developed.   Assignee was to "The Dis Corperation" (get it?).  I guess he was scared by the movie

/found the patent, read the story years ago
//patent lapsed, let the mad science begin!  (thunder rolls)

[patentimages.storage.googleapis.com image 850x1248]


///probably was scared by below as a kid.
[3.bp.blogspot.com image 850x512]


Patents only last twenty years at most, so stopping anyone else doing it would (a) not stop others doing it for private research etc and (b) only last twenty years.

The article is a bit misinformed and/or biased. Patents and Copyrights were designed to allow the creator to profit by having an exclusive period. That's the whole point. Otherwise why have patents at all? You invent something? Great. Start making it and sell as many as you can before all your competitors copy you.
It will cost millions to develop and you make something like a drug that has to be publicly disclosed before you start selling it so you competitors can reach the market the same day as you without having to spend those millions? Tough.

Result? No one will spend millions developing new drugs. Why would they if they can just be undercut by everyone else on day one?

Result? No new drugs.


So how is the law profession these days?
 
2014-04-20 08:51:18 AM

Flint Ironstag: Vlad_the_Inaner: It's not new.  Some guy was scared of certain mad-science like things, and wanted to prevent such technology from being developed.   Assignee was to "The Dis Corperation" (get it?).  I guess he was scared by the movie

/found the patent, read the story years ago
//patent lapsed, let the mad science begin!  (thunder rolls)

[patentimages.storage.googleapis.com image 850x1248]


///probably was scared by below as a kid.
[3.bp.blogspot.com image 850x512]


Patents only last twenty years at most, so stopping anyone else doing it would (a) not stop others doing it for private research etc and (b) only last twenty years.

The article is a bit misinformed and/or biased. Patents and Copyrights were designed to allow the creator to profit by having an exclusive period. That's the whole point. Otherwise why have patents at all? You invent something? Great. Start making it and sell as many as you can before all your competitors copy you.
It will cost millions to develop and you make something like a drug that has to be publicly disclosed before you start selling it so you competitors can reach the market the same day as you without having to spend those millions? Tough.

Result? No one will spend millions developing new drugs. Why would they if they can just be undercut by everyone else on day one?

Result? No new drugs.


Huey Lewis has been upset about this patent since 1985.
 
2014-04-20 09:12:48 AM

Prophet of Loss: Flint Ironstag: Vlad_the_Inaner: It's not new.  Some guy was scared of certain mad-science like things, and wanted to prevent such technology from being developed.   Assignee was to "The Dis Corperation" (get it?).  I guess he was scared by the movie

/found the patent, read the story years ago
//patent lapsed, let the mad science begin!  (thunder rolls)

[patentimages.storage.googleapis.com image 850x1248]


///probably was scared by below as a kid.
[3.bp.blogspot.com image 850x512]


Patents only last twenty years at most, so stopping anyone else doing it would (a) not stop others doing it for private research etc and (b) only last twenty years.

The article is a bit misinformed and/or biased. Patents and Copyrights were designed to allow the creator to profit by having an exclusive period. That's the whole point. Otherwise why have patents at all? You invent something? Great. Start making it and sell as many as you can before all your competitors copy you.
It will cost millions to develop and you make something like a drug that has to be publicly disclosed before you start selling it so you competitors can reach the market the same day as you without having to spend those millions? Tough.

Result? No one will spend millions developing new drugs. Why would they if they can just be undercut by everyone else on day one?

Result? No new drugs.

So how is the law profession these days?



No idea. I've patented a couple of things I came up with so I know slightly more about that. I'm also a writer so I know a bit about Copyright.

There is a good argument for the twenty year life of a patent to be extended, and made a free process as Copyright is. James Dyson took ten years to get his vacuum cleaner into production, and that was half his patent life gone before he sold a single one. Many things like drugs can take many years to develop, again leaving only a few years of exclusivity to recoup the huge cost of developing them. Maybe thirty year patents or even longer should be introduced.

/You can of course leave patenting until the very last minute but then you run the risk of someone else beating you to it. Unlike the US the rest of the world has a strict First To File system. You could spend a decade and a hundred million dollars developing a drug and someone else patents it days before you*, meaning not only do you not have exclusivity you can't even make it at all!

*Hopefully we no longer have cases like Edison bribing a patent clerk to steal the telephone patent from another inventor.
 
2014-04-20 11:04:30 AM
It used to be that you couldn't patent an idea. But it seems that from what I read that this is out, and now patenting rounded corners on pocket devices is completely patentable. So obviously as long as you have buttloads of money you can patent anything.
 
2014-04-20 02:02:40 PM
The problem is the USPTO is filled with people who used to ride the short bus to school while wearing helmets.  If you stick with it and pay all of the fees and it looks professionally done, you have a 90% chance of getting a patent awarded, no matter how lame or stupidly obvious the idea is.  As I've said before, go to Google patents or one of the other search engines and look for things you know about; draw your own conclusions.  It's shocking how many overlapping patents for utterly obvious things exist.  And that's just utility patents.  Design patents are beyond a joke at this point.

Flint Ironstag: There is a good argument for the twenty year life of a patent to be extended, and made a free process as Copyright is. James Dyson took ten years to get his vacuum cleaner into production, and that was half his patent life gone before he sold a single one.


I'm not gonna shed any tears for Dyson.  This is exactly what I'm talking about:

Vacuum cleaner  USD675390
Vacuum cleaner  USD671696
Dual cyclonic vacuum cleaner  US5558697
Part of a vacuum cleaner  USD670054
Part of a vacuum cleaner  USD670050
Part of a vacuum cleaner  USD670053
Part of a vacuum cleaner  USD679878
Part of a vacuum cleaner  USD676206
Vacuum cleaner  USD675798
Vacuum cleaner  USD674977
Part of a vacuum cleaner  USD674972
Accessory for vacuum cleaner  USD671888
Part of a vacuum cleanerUSD672103
Part of a vacuum cleanerUSD670056
Vacuum cleanerUSD674159
Vacuum cleanerUSD484286
Vacuum cleanerUSD413698
Vacuum cleanerUSD668823

Part of a vacuum cleaner  USD667186
Part of a vacuum cleanerUSD659923


That's just the first 20 I found.  He has hundreds.

Because People in power are Stupid: So obviously as long as you have buttloads of money you can patent anything.


Pretty much.  The sadder part is you don't even need buttloads.  $10k will do it if you're careful.  $25k even if you're an idiot and your attorney sucks.   You would think this is 'democratizing' for innovation, unfortunately what it means is the people with money like Dyson can spend millions and generate hundreds of patents and people like me and others here with 5-10 patents will get buttraped in court because judges know jack shiat about technology, and yeah, the rich person has better representation.
 
2014-04-21 12:23:18 AM

Flint Ironstag: Prophet of Loss: Flint Ironstag: Vlad_the_Inaner: It's not new.  Some guy was scared of certain mad-science like things, and wanted to prevent such technology from being developed.   Assignee was to "The Dis Corperation" (get it?).  I guess he was scared by the movie

/found the patent, read the story years ago
//patent lapsed, let the mad science begin!  (thunder rolls)

[patentimages.storage.googleapis.com image 850x1248]


///probably was scared by below as a kid.
[3.bp.blogspot.com image 850x512]


Patents only last twenty years at most, so stopping anyone else doing it would (a) not stop others doing it for private research etc and (b) only last twenty years.

The article is a bit misinformed and/or biased. Patents and Copyrights were designed to allow the creator to profit by having an exclusive period. That's the whole point. Otherwise why have patents at all? You invent something? Great. Start making it and sell as many as you can before all your competitors copy you.
It will cost millions to develop and you make something like a drug that has to be publicly disclosed before you start selling it so you competitors can reach the market the same day as you without having to spend those millions? Tough.

Result? No one will spend millions developing new drugs. Why would they if they can just be undercut by everyone else on day one?

Result? No new drugs.

So how is the law profession these days?


No idea. I've patented a couple of things I came up with so I know slightly more about that. I'm also a writer so I know a bit about Copyright.

There is a good argument for the twenty year life of a patent to be extended, and made a free process as Copyright is. James Dyson took ten years to get his vacuum cleaner into production, and that was half his patent life gone before he sold a single one. Many things like drugs can take many years to develop, again leaving only a few years of exclusivity to recoup the huge cost of developing them. Maybe thirty year patents o ...


US is First to file for effective filing dates of March 2013 onwards.

Bacontastesgood: The problem is the USPTO is filled with people who used to ride the short bus to school while wearing helmets.  If you stick with it and pay all of the fees and it looks professionally done, you have a 90% chance of getting a patent awarded, no matter how lame or stupidly obvious the idea is.  As I've said before, go to Google patents or one of the other search engines and look for things you know about; draw your own conclusions.  It's shocking how many overlapping patents for utterly obvious things exist.  And that's just utility patents.  Design patents are beyond a joke at this point.


And you can go fark yourself.
 
Displayed 16 of 16 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report