3 ms·
Inspectors don't really concern themselves with verifying that an invention works. That would be insanely expensive. It's on the inventor to make something work
by acjohnson55 8y ago
Inspectors don't really concern themselves with verifying that an invention works. That would be insanely expensive. It's on the inventor to make something work so that they can profit. Although I do think inventors should have some burden of proof that they're effectively using their patent to provide a service to the market that justifies their monopoly protection.
- astrodev 8y agoAs a matter of fact, it is normal for patent examiners to not even read the invention specification and focus only on the claims. I was surprised to learn that from a patent attorney, but it seems to be common knowledge, e.g. [1]. Upon reflection, that's the only way it can work. A generalist patent examiner could never understand all the inventions given the volume of applications they must handle. [1] http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2016/07/25/anatomy-bogus-alice-rejection/id=71192/ http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2016/07/25/anatomy-bogus-alice-rej...
- jwatte 8y agoIt's only the claims that matter, but the claims typically draw on vocabulary and context established in the disclosure. Often, part of getting a patent granted is clarifying the disclosure such that the examiner can understand the idea and how it's different from previous art.