On TV.com: MEGAN FOX Photos
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 18 of 58:
Next »
« Previous
perpetual motion...
Currently the only item required by the USPTO to exist prior to being patented is a perpetual motion machine. Other than that, a set of documentation showing clearly the intent of a patent is enough.

Even then, it is doubtful the examiners do their job, a company I once worked for was looking at building a machine to remove dust from car bodies prior to painting, and they were also on the sidelines (not embroiled in the suit itself) of a dispute over a machine that did the same job. The 'patent' holder had done nothing other than take the equipment used for washing cars (a design from the 50's & 60's) replace the cloth rollers with ostrich feathers and was awarded a patent on the whole thing. And no, they did not come up with the idea of using the ostrich feathers, that was developed almost concurrently yet independently by the automakers and the paint industry.

What needs to be recognized is the concept of 'abandonment' where a patent holder who cannot show they are either in active development of a product, in search of investors of a product for a patent or fails to defend a patent for a period of years, should be considered to have abandoned it. This BS where a company not only announces it's intentions to develop, manufacture and market a product only to be slapped with a lawsuit 5 years after it becomes a success is a joke. Most civil claims are limited in their action, especially from damages simply because most courts and law figure that if the owner hadn't cared for 3 or four years, why should the courts?
Posted by: engrmerc   Posted on: 02/12/06 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

GOOD  blenky | 02/09/06
...more  blenky | 02/09/06
Patents are for protecting intellectual property.  jimroar2000 | 02/09/06
Utopia  blenky | 02/09/06
I'm one of the little men  Ken_z | 02/09/06
There's the difference  blenky | 02/09/06
NPT didn't invent ANYTHING!!  Predrag Vasic | 02/09/06
One of it's partners did!  pics@... | 02/09/06
That may be true, but...  Predrag Vasic | 02/09/06
Not from what I read  voska | 02/09/06
Amen, As i've said before if you don't develpo it, then lose the rights (NT  Update victim | 02/09/06
A lesson on Patents....  Cayble | 02/09/06
Well stated.  blenky | 02/09/06
...And, as been eluded to,...  The King's Servant | 02/09/06
Good Point, but...  pics@... | 02/09/06
If the U.S. Patent Office only understood this !!! (NT)  Update victim | 02/09/06
use  zzgorme | 02/10/06
perpetual motion...  engrmerc | 02/12/06
A well-written but bad lesson. Why patents are so misunderstood.  alphachi | 02/13/06
Either you missed the point, or you do not get patent law....  Cayble | 02/26/06
Sorry, lost some of the messge there!  Cayble | 02/26/06
I somewhat agree, however  Update victim | 02/09/06
tax payers money  clockmendergb@... | 02/09/06
A lot of broad assumptions jimroar2000  billywill | 02/09/06
Interesting logic - let's ignore the USPO rulings  canuck_golfer | 02/09/06
Patent Search  Techanalyst | 02/10/06
jurisdiction....  engrmerc | 02/12/06
Prior Art  Sheeva | 02/16/06
What a joke!  techboy_z | 02/09/06
Ok techboy  blenky | 02/09/06
not an alumni and not Canadian  ttocsmij | 02/09/06
techboy may have just...  John Zern | 02/12/06
how it works  zzgorme | 02/09/06
Comparing Apples to Oranges  blenky | 02/09/06
squatting  zzgorme | 02/10/06
there is a difference...  engrmerc | 02/12/06
A breath of fresh air  Bruce_B2 | 02/09/06
Patent Holding Companies.  clockmendergb@... | 02/09/06
transfers  zzgorme | 02/10/06
Benefit of the community  biomedr | 02/18/06
So where are the details of the workaround?  jfranche@... | 02/09/06
RIM workaround  iswcky | 02/09/06
I second the "Good"  Narg | 02/09/06
Royalties  ljuly | 02/09/06
Workaround...  blenky | 02/09/06
The only way they would be 'loosers' would be...  Predrag Vasic | 02/09/06
Royalties  brichter | 02/09/06
Is this why BB halted their suit against MS?  ThinkAboutIt | 02/09/06
Has anyone read the NTP patent?  lamp299 | 02/09/06
Slew 'O Patents  jaytho | 02/09/06
Yes, I have.  DickCaro | 02/10/06
claims  zzgorme | 02/10/06
you missed it by "" much...  engrmerc | 02/12/06
patents  Ron406 | 02/09/06
works for me  ttocsmij | 02/09/06
Sounds like the work-around may not be so great  John Zern | 02/12/06
simple  engrmerc | 02/12/06
Revealed?  jacjar1 | 02/13/06

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement

SmartPlanet

Click Here