4 ms·

In practice, novelty is determined by prior patents because that is what the examiners search. "Yes, for the patent definition of obvious, basically all the pa

In practice, novelty is determined by prior patents because that is what the examiners search. "Yes, for the patent definition of obvious, basically all the parts are going to have to be either patented, or in some printed publication." -- Patent Examiner "lordnecro" (http://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/ww982/iama_patent_examiner_i_want_to_answer_questions/c5hau6v http://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/ww982/iama_patent_e...) See the rest of the thread for the example where an idea is used in open source software prior to a patent application by a third party. The patent examiner concedes that this would likely not be found by the examiner, therefore the patent would be granted. It likely would not stand up in court, but that doesn't help anyone that can't afford the legal defense.

learc83 14y ago
Did you skip the part where I said to ensure the examiner finds it you can file and then abandon?
- jedbrown 14y ago
  You still have to prepare the application and pay some fees. http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/qs/ope/fee092611.htm http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/qs/ope/fee092611.htm If a doubly-linked list is patentable, how many things have you built this month that are also patentable? Do you really have time to write all those bogus patent applications? In academia, it's a much better use of time to publish scientific papers, present at conferences, and put it in open source software. Industry has market-driven motivations.