3 ms·
I agree that this is the way back to sanity. Most of the patents I have been noticing waved around are "Do something we did 50 years ago... but on a computer".
by jgoewert 12y ago
I agree that this is the way back to sanity.
Most of the patents I have been noticing waved around are "Do something we did 50 years ago... but on a computer". Is the "on a computer" really a definitive mark.
On the idea of 'paper patents', what is to stop someone from registering something barely plausible today that may occur in the near future? Say, something like "3d printed food" where a file that contains the information on the material is structurally printed and heated/cooled. It isn't possible with our current tech, but when someone figures it out 5-10 years from now, you could spring that Jack out of the box and rake in cash.
- rhino369 12y agoThere is an enablement requirement. The patent has to be able to teach a " person skilled in the art" how to use the invention. You can't patent 3d printed food without disclosing how to do. But the strategy you suggest is sort of used. The patent attorney will keep open an application for years using procedural tactics, and then try to get claims focused on modern products into the patent.
- jarcane 12y agoI am informed that actually the Patent Office is at least starting to back away from 'on a computer' patents. I confronted a rather weaselly dude attempting to patent troll tabletop roleplaying games by filing for a claim on character conversions, with an exceedingly vague 'with a computer' veneer over it. Fortunately the guy had his application rejected twice, and looked due to have it rejected again (as well as having attracted attention from much bigger fish) before he closed ranks and disappeared.