3 ms·
Just because it ‘felt natural’ doesn’t imply that it’s a discovery rather than invention. Generally in IP the word discovery is in regard to a natural phenomeno
by patentatt 6y ago
Just because it ‘felt natural’ doesn’t imply that it’s a discovery rather than invention. Generally in IP the word discovery is in regard to a natural phenomenon, something found in nature. Natural laws are discovered, everything else is invented. So what you describe sounds like an invention rather than a discovery.
- varispeed 6y agoI would disagree. For example phase is one of the parameters of the grain, so to modulate the phase how come it an invention, but to modulate a filter cut off is not? The same tolerance is inherent part of analogue component, as it is very difficult to achieve exact value of e.g. capacitance, so components are manufactured with different levels of tolerance, so if you simply acknowledge this fact of life in your simulation how is that an invention?
- ncmncm 6y agoAt least US has a carve-out for obviousness to people in the field. It has been chipped away at for a long time, so there might not be anything left of it.
- varispeed 6y agoThe TMT I was talking about has gone through fairly recently. Please take a look https://patents.google.com/patent/US20170060527A1/en https://patents.google.com/patent/US20170060527A1/en It's crazy.
- jiggawatts 6y agoWhat they are describing is literally a vanilla Monte Carlo simulation! It's the bread and butter of applied mathematicians in thousands of fields. It reminds me of a patent for fire. Yes, fire. It was worded carefully to hide this, and it was approved. Something like: "A method by which a self-sustaining avalanche of thermal chemical reactions is initiated by an externally applied heat source." In other words: We lit it on fire with a match.