4 ms·

I can memorize your patented design too. Doesn't make it less illegal for me recreate it from memory.

by motoxpro 4y ago

kurthr 4y ago
It does if it's over 20 years from the application date. It does if you match on a design published before the application date. It does if you change the design just enough not to read onto a single claim. Honestly, training a generative model on the patent database could be very useful for inventing and invalidating patents. I wouldn't be surprised if examiners are using it in 5+ years. Since they've got required response count and time, I wouldn't be surprised, if they started using it just to speed up their own work.
ravel-bar-foo 4y ago
The relevant law here isn't patent law. It is copyright and trademark law. If you memorize a famous (recent) painting and recreate that as closely as you can, is it copyright violation or a transformative derivative work? I guess it depends on your process, intent, and fidelity. Oh, and on local laws.
- BaseballPhysics 4y ago
  > is it copyright violation or a transformative derivative work? Short answer: for any country participating in WIPO, yes it is. Edit: And if you don't believe me, let's replace the word "painting" with the word "song": > If you memorize a famous (recent) song and recreate that as closely as you can, is it copyright violation or a transformative derivative work? Hopefully everyone here knows the answer is "absolutely yes!" which is why artists need permission to cover other people's music. Now, yes, intent factors in, insofar as it affects a potential fair use defense. But that doesn't affect that status of the work, it only determines whether the action to violate copyright is defensible This is how Google gets away with returning images in their search result, and why I can't just copy an image they return and use it without myself violating copyright.

4 ms·

I can memorize your patented design too. Doesn't make it less illegal for me recreate it from memory.

by motoxpro 4y ago

I can memorize your patented design too. Doesn't make it less illegal for me recreate it from memory.

kurthr 4y ago
It does if it's over 20 years from the application date. It does if you match on a design published before the application date. It does if you change the design just enough not to read onto a single claim. Honestly, training a generative model on the patent database could be very useful for inventing and invalidating patents. I wouldn't be surprised if examiners are using it in 5+ years. Since they've got required response count and time, I wouldn't be surprised, if they started using it just to speed up their own work.
ravel-bar-foo 4y ago
The relevant law here isn't patent law. It is copyright and trademark law. If you memorize a famous (recent) painting and recreate that as closely as you can, is it copyright violation or a transformative derivative work? I guess it depends on your process, intent, and fidelity. Oh, and on local laws.
- BaseballPhysics 4y ago
  > is it copyright violation or a transformative derivative work? Short answer: for any country participating in WIPO, yes it is. Edit: And if you don't believe me, let's replace the word "painting" with the word "song": > If you memorize a famous (recent) song and recreate that as closely as you can, is it copyright violation or a transformative derivative work? Hopefully everyone here knows the answer is "absolutely yes!" which is why artists need permission to cover other people's music. Now, yes, intent factors in, insofar as it affects a potential fair use defense. But that doesn't affect that status of the work, it only determines whether the action to violate copyright is defensible This is how Google gets away with returning images in their search result, and why I can't just copy an image they return and use it without myself violating copyright.