4 ms·
Thomas Edison freely admitted most of his 1,093 US patents were for inventions that would never have worked. Patenting a completely ridiculous and impossible i
by mchannon 8y ago
Thomas Edison freely admitted most of his 1,093 US patents were for inventions that would never have worked.
Patenting a completely ridiculous and impossible idea is quite straightforward if you know the system and have the money and reputation.
Journalists are notoriously bad at technical due diligence, but the fact is even trained scientists and engineers can be duped, particularly when access is limited.
Having been in a similar situation (not the federal one), where something looked fishy in a company I was involved in (and ended up being revealed as fishier than fish), I wouldn't be at all surprised if it comes out that the patents were fine, the ideas were fine, the talent had the skills, and it would have been less work on everybody's part to actually build it than to lie, cheat, and misrepresent it.
I have never been to or interviewed anywhere more paranoid/aggressively secretive than Theranos, and that includes military bases and classified government installations. This should be the moral of the story: investors should take as a red flag companies that work that hard to show you they're hiding their technology.
- narrator 8y agoPatenting inventions that don't work is a great way to waste a lot of money on patent attorneys and patent office fees. Worldwide patenting can get even more ridiculously expensive. There are some really nutty patents out there.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- vlovich123 8y agoThe reason it's done is that you structure the patent broad enough & vague enough to still be enforceable but cover more than what exact specific thing you were actually thinking about. It's shitty IMO & a lot of patent trolls rely on this but that's one of the downsides of the way the patent system works (it's a tradeoff - if you tried to solve this problem you'd end up creating other problems so you have to figure out which downsides your OK living with or mitigating in other ways).
- windyfeeling 8y agoI am listed as (co)inventor for several patents from my last job with a big firm. All but a couple of them my report to my team lead was along the lines of “this new method does not provide a benefit over what’s existing, but also does not negatively impact.” It’s truly an experience sitting in a conference call with a company patent lawyer where you say one thing and then you listen to them spin it in a more positive light. The money needed to file the patents pay out patent bonuses (to the people listed as (co)inventors) is literally a rounding error. My team lead held on the order of tens of patents, all with similar findings, all filed to prevent our competition from patenting first.
- skookumchuck 8y agoIsn't it ironic that people who cheat on exams expend so much effort at it? Wouldn't it be easier to just learn the material?
- auxbuss 8y agoFear of failure (of negative evaluation) is a strong psychological force for those seeking social approval. One way is to avoid evaluation entirely or until things are certain.