4 ms·
> existing things with maybe a new twist somewhere. To be valid, a claim must be novel (new) and non-obvious over the prior art. So there absolutely must be a
by bdowling 6y ago
> existing things with maybe a new twist somewhere.
To be valid, a claim must be novel (new) and non-obvious over the prior art. So there absolutely must be a new twist somewhere.
- adrianN 6y agoI can still build a machine entirely from off-the shelf parts, connecting them exactly in the ways they're built to connect to each other, and claim to have invented it.
- bdowling 6y agoIf the resulting combination is a machine that is useful, new, and non-obvious, then I'd call that an invention.