7 ms·

A few inventors find the contents of their patents declared government secrets

57 points by beezle 10y ago

x3n0ph3n3 10y ago
That's what you get for giving away your secrets to the government for their "protection." He should have just made the product and sold it.
crypto5 10y ago
reminds me this good movie: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travelling_Salesman_(2012_film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travelling_Salesman_(2012_film... Guys found proof for P = NP, and government declared it as national asset and government secret.
- underyx 10y ago
  The wording makes it sound like this is supposed to be a documentary, so to clarify, it's fiction.
- Houshalter 10y ago
  If I remember correctly, the government was just offering to pay them for the algorithm. They didn't declare it a secret and force them to sell it. That is why the whole movie was them just debating what they should do with it.
  - crypto5 10y ago
    They declared. Government agent started explicitly threatening them with multiple felonies for proof disclosure and threatening 4th guy's family if he will not sign papers.
- ikeboy 10y ago
  They found it while working for the government iirc
  - crypto5 10y ago
    Yes, but whole story is about that initial contract didn't have non-disclosure clause, they planned to publish their result, and government wanted to add it afterwards and force them to sign new papers, and discussion was about that. Also in my understanding initial work was about something else, and P=NP proof was some side result.
zekevermillion 10y ago
Seems like a potential incentive for those with national security-related inventions to stay away from the USPTO altogether, and rely on trade secrecy instead.
- jandrewrogers 10y ago
  The caveat is that something similar applies to trade secrets as well, it is just much more difficult for the government to monitor than patent filings. It is difficult to deem a technology as a national security secret if it is only noticed after it is being sold commercially.
  - zekevermillion 10y ago
    Aha, that makes sense. I suppose even if you keep something a trade secret, if you're out there selling stealth-detecting radar interpreters then the guvmint will find out and come see what you're up to. But the crazy inventor in his garage is not going to be able to commercialize it himself.
- trhway 10y ago
  i'd think that it is the other way - in parallel with filing of a patent application you can just publish it on the Internet thus making any application of secrecy to it pointless (until of course publishing of such info is in violation of some already existing law in the first place). "national security-related inventions" - it is a pretty vague notion. Anybody who saw real "national interest" Green Card applications can attest to it :) All China driving Priuses or Teslas would make China much more [energy] independent and this definitely would be related to US national security. Does it mean that such patents and technology should be made controlled or even secret?
  - Normal_gaussian 10y ago
    publishing it on the internet prevents protection for you to make money off it. Charitable yes, but not exactly in their interests.
Shivetya 10y ago
so basically a seizure without any compensation required? I do think the government having issued such an order should be bound in determining an appropriate amount of money to be issued as compensation, tax free. ideas are property, they have value, and if a government is going to take your ideas then they by default admit value so there is a taking.
- mdjeu 10y ago
  I had a similar reaction--the arguments about whether or not the patent have value seem silly, because if they didn't the government wouldn't issue the secrecy order to begin with, to say the least of defending the secrecy order. If they have no value, the secrecy order should be rescinded. The freedom of speech issue seems to supercede other concerns in my mind, and I also have problems with the idea of IP in general (and in that respect disagree with you). However, ignoring all of that, there are other fundamental flaws with the government's arguments.
- GTP 10y ago
  "ideas are property, they have value, and if a government is going to take your ideas then they by default admit value so there is a taking". I agree with you but I think there's a problem that a lawyer may exploit: the goveranment is making them secret not because their monetary value but because they think they could harm national security in some way.
ChuckMcM 10y ago
When I was researching the Engima machine for my Java Card emulator[1] I came across the patent issued for the Enigma Rotor system in the US[2]. Filed in 1944 it issued in 1976! Actually October 12th, 1976 which was the same day that NIST announced DES as the new encryption standard[3]. [1] http://www.javaworld.com/article/2076726/learn-java/my-enigmatic-java-ring.html http://www.javaworld.com/article/2076726/learn-java/my-enigm... [2] http://www.google.com/patents/US3984922 http://www.google.com/patents/US3984922 [3] http://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/sp958-lide/250-253.pdf http://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/sp958-lide/250-253.pdf
joesmo 10y ago
How about not allowing fantasy ideas that have no basis in reality to be patented? That will solve a whole lot of problems, the least of which is this.
Animats 10y ago
There's a significant example of this: Airadar, from 1973.[1] Rufus Applegarth, an experienced avionics designer, had retired from a major avionics company (he was one of the founders) and started work on a new generation of radar units for small planes. He developed a phased-array radar with electronic scanning and a conformal antenna that fit in the leading edge of the wing. Existing aircraft radars in those days had a mechanically scanned dish in the nose of the aircraft, and there was no place to put that on a single-engine plane. Airadar was way ahead of what the USAF had. It worked. He put it in a small plane, and Flying magazine reviewed it. Then he was faced with a patent secrecy order. Airadar wasn't heard from again. It was decades before electronically scanned radars for light aircraft became available again. [1] https://books.google.com/books?id=NWzlTqj0gQ4C&pg=PA64 https://books.google.com/books?id=NWzlTqj0gQ4C&pg=PA64
- secfirstmd 10y ago
  In the case of a government forcing secrecy on your patent, thus blocking you from public ally commercialising it - is the governemnt then expected to compensate you in return for your loss?
  - URSpider94 10y ago
    RTFA. The answer is generally no. As with most secrecy cases, it's really hard to prove that the tech has value, since you can't show it to anyone to gauge their interest.
  - grkvlt 10y ago
    Would you not immediately start trying to commercialise the invention with the military? There are plenty of defence contractors with security clearances that you could show the secret patent to, and offer to secretly license it to them so they can make a device that has the obvious advantage that the government has declared an interest in it!
x1798DE 10y ago
I don't totally understand how this is not a violation of one's free speech if ideas are being banned. I can see where they get the power to prevent the patent from issuing, but what part of the constitution allows you to ban a private citizen from speaking about their ideas?
- gherkin0 10y ago
  > but what part of the constitution allows you to ban a private citizen from speaking about their ideas? Perhaps no part. The article states the government has been careful to back down when challenged in order to avoid that question being decided in court.
- URSpider94 10y ago
  The part about "yelling fire in a crowded theatre." There are tons of restrictions on free speech, the government must prove a compelling interest.
  - dalke 10y ago
    There are restrictions on "time, manner, and place". You can't use a bullhorn to make political speeches on a suburban street corner at 3am. You can't stand up in the middle of a concert to give a discourse on Hegelian philosophy. You can't use graffiti to express your dislike of the EMU. And the "[falsely] yelling fire in a crowded theatre" was used in the decision of Schenck v. United States in 1919 to say that opposition to the draft during World War I was not covered under free speech. It was then used as cover to punish anti-government speech, and was overturned in Brandenburg v. Ohio in 1969. Quoting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio : > Finally, Douglas dealt with the classic example of a man "falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic". In order to explain why someone could be legitimately prosecuted for this, Douglas called it an example in which "speech is brigaded with action". In the view of Douglas and Black, this was probably the only sort of case in which a person could be prosecuted for speech.
deftnerd 10y ago
If someone invents something that gets classified as secret and then a decade later another inventor invents the same thing, but by then the government doesn't feel the need to classify it anymore, would the original inventor have any recourse? How does patent infringement claims work in a world with secret patents?
faebi 10y ago
If a patent is secret, shouldn't it then be possible to get the patent in another country? I mean how should others know something is secret? Or am I missing something?
- dogma1138 10y ago
  I think the espionage act might have something to say about it.
  - Finnucane 10y ago
    More likely, depending on the nature of the patent, export controls, which are specifically covered by the Invention Secrecy Act.
pmx 10y ago
“Nobody has invented warp drive or time travel. They’re fairly mundane inventions that may have some relevance to the military,” None of the ones they have released from secrecy. Anything as incredible as those examples is more likely to stay secret.

57 points by beezle 10y ago

That's what you get for giving away your secrets to the government for their "protection." He should have just made the product and sold it.

crypto5 10y ago

reminds me this good movie: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travelling_Salesman_(2012_film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travelling_Salesman_(2012_film... Guys found proof for P = NP, and government declared it as national asset and government secret.

underyx 10y ago
The wording makes it sound like this is supposed to be a documentary, so to clarify, it's fiction.
Houshalter 10y ago
If I remember correctly, the government was just offering to pay them for the algorithm. They didn't declare it a secret and force them to sell it. That is why the whole movie was them just debating what they should do with it.
- crypto5 10y ago
  They declared. Government agent started explicitly threatening them with multiple felonies for proof disclosure and threatening 4th guy's family if he will not sign papers.
ikeboy 10y ago
They found it while working for the government iirc
- crypto5 10y ago
  Yes, but whole story is about that initial contract didn't have non-disclosure clause, they planned to publish their result, and government wanted to add it afterwards and force them to sign new papers, and discussion was about that. Also in my understanding initial work was about something else, and P=NP proof was some side result.

zekevermillion 10y ago

Seems like a potential incentive for those with national security-related inventions to stay away from the USPTO altogether, and rely on trade secrecy instead.

jandrewrogers 10y ago
The caveat is that something similar applies to trade secrets as well, it is just much more difficult for the government to monitor than patent filings. It is difficult to deem a technology as a national security secret if it is only noticed after it is being sold commercially.
- zekevermillion 10y ago
  Aha, that makes sense. I suppose even if you keep something a trade secret, if you're out there selling stealth-detecting radar interpreters then the guvmint will find out and come see what you're up to. But the crazy inventor in his garage is not going to be able to commercialize it himself.
trhway 10y ago
i'd think that it is the other way - in parallel with filing of a patent application you can just publish it on the Internet thus making any application of secrecy to it pointless (until of course publishing of such info is in violation of some already existing law in the first place). "national security-related inventions" - it is a pretty vague notion. Anybody who saw real "national interest" Green Card applications can attest to it :) All China driving Priuses or Teslas would make China much more [energy] independent and this definitely would be related to US national security. Does it mean that such patents and technology should be made controlled or even secret?
- Normal_gaussian 10y ago
  publishing it on the internet prevents protection for you to make money off it. Charitable yes, but not exactly in their interests.

Shivetya 10y ago

so basically a seizure without any compensation required? I do think the government having issued such an order should be bound in determining an appropriate amount of money to be issued as compensation, tax free. ideas are property, they have value, and if a government is going to take your ideas then they by default admit value so there is a taking.

mdjeu 10y ago
I had a similar reaction--the arguments about whether or not the patent have value seem silly, because if they didn't the government wouldn't issue the secrecy order to begin with, to say the least of defending the secrecy order. If they have no value, the secrecy order should be rescinded. The freedom of speech issue seems to supercede other concerns in my mind, and I also have problems with the idea of IP in general (and in that respect disagree with you). However, ignoring all of that, there are other fundamental flaws with the government's arguments.
GTP 10y ago
"ideas are property, they have value, and if a government is going to take your ideas then they by default admit value so there is a taking". I agree with you but I think there's a problem that a lawyer may exploit: the goveranment is making them secret not because their monetary value but because they think they could harm national security in some way.

ChuckMcM 10y ago

When I was researching the Engima machine for my Java Card emulator[1] I came across the patent issued for the Enigma Rotor system in the US[2]. Filed in 1944 it issued in 1976! Actually October 12th, 1976 which was the same day that NIST announced DES as the new encryption standard[3]. [1] http://www.javaworld.com/article/2076726/learn-java/my-enigmatic-java-ring.html http://www.javaworld.com/article/2076726/learn-java/my-enigm... [2] http://www.google.com/patents/US3984922 http://www.google.com/patents/US3984922 [3] http://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/sp958-lide/250-253.pdf http://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/sp958-lide/250-253.pdf

joesmo 10y ago

How about not allowing fantasy ideas that have no basis in reality to be patented? That will solve a whole lot of problems, the least of which is this.

Animats 10y ago

There's a significant example of this: Airadar, from 1973.[1] Rufus Applegarth, an experienced avionics designer, had retired from a major avionics company (he was one of the founders) and started work on a new generation of radar units for small planes. He developed a phased-array radar with electronic scanning and a conformal antenna that fit in the leading edge of the wing. Existing aircraft radars in those days had a mechanically scanned dish in the nose of the aircraft, and there was no place to put that on a single-engine plane. Airadar was way ahead of what the USAF had. It worked. He put it in a small plane, and Flying magazine reviewed it. Then he was faced with a patent secrecy order. Airadar wasn't heard from again. It was decades before electronically scanned radars for light aircraft became available again. [1] https://books.google.com/books?id=NWzlTqj0gQ4C&pg=PA64 https://books.google.com/books?id=NWzlTqj0gQ4C&pg=PA64

secfirstmd 10y ago
In the case of a government forcing secrecy on your patent, thus blocking you from public ally commercialising it - is the governemnt then expected to compensate you in return for your loss?
- URSpider94 10y ago
  RTFA. The answer is generally no. As with most secrecy cases, it's really hard to prove that the tech has value, since you can't show it to anyone to gauge their interest.
- grkvlt 10y ago
  Would you not immediately start trying to commercialise the invention with the military? There are plenty of defence contractors with security clearances that you could show the secret patent to, and offer to secretly license it to them so they can make a device that has the obvious advantage that the government has declared an interest in it!

x1798DE 10y ago

I don't totally understand how this is not a violation of one's free speech if ideas are being banned. I can see where they get the power to prevent the patent from issuing, but what part of the constitution allows you to ban a private citizen from speaking about their ideas?

gherkin0 10y ago
> but what part of the constitution allows you to ban a private citizen from speaking about their ideas? Perhaps no part. The article states the government has been careful to back down when challenged in order to avoid that question being decided in court.
URSpider94 10y ago
The part about "yelling fire in a crowded theatre." There are tons of restrictions on free speech, the government must prove a compelling interest.
- dalke 10y ago
  There are restrictions on "time, manner, and place". You can't use a bullhorn to make political speeches on a suburban street corner at 3am. You can't stand up in the middle of a concert to give a discourse on Hegelian philosophy. You can't use graffiti to express your dislike of the EMU. And the "[falsely] yelling fire in a crowded theatre" was used in the decision of Schenck v. United States in 1919 to say that opposition to the draft during World War I was not covered under free speech. It was then used as cover to punish anti-government speech, and was overturned in Brandenburg v. Ohio in 1969. Quoting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio : > Finally, Douglas dealt with the classic example of a man "falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic". In order to explain why someone could be legitimately prosecuted for this, Douglas called it an example in which "speech is brigaded with action". In the view of Douglas and Black, this was probably the only sort of case in which a person could be prosecuted for speech.

deftnerd 10y ago

If someone invents something that gets classified as secret and then a decade later another inventor invents the same thing, but by then the government doesn't feel the need to classify it anymore, would the original inventor have any recourse? How does patent infringement claims work in a world with secret patents?

faebi 10y ago

If a patent is secret, shouldn't it then be possible to get the patent in another country? I mean how should others know something is secret? Or am I missing something?

dogma1138 10y ago
I think the espionage act might have something to say about it.
- Finnucane 10y ago
  More likely, depending on the nature of the patent, export controls, which are specifically covered by the Invention Secrecy Act.

pmx 10y ago

“Nobody has invented warp drive or time travel. They’re fairly mundane inventions that may have some relevance to the military,” None of the ones they have released from secrecy. Anything as incredible as those examples is more likely to stay secret.