Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations cowski on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
When you have an idea 4
- Thread starter dicer
- Start date
BrunoPuntzJones
Materials
IRStuff,
I think you've misunderstood my point, we are in fact in agreement. I was referring to the idea of mailing yourself documentation on your ideas so that you could *in theory* demonstrate prior art if someone tried to patent something you had previously thought of.
This doesn't work however, since in order for the documentation to invalid the patent, the information must be available publicly before the patent was filed for.
The only thing that dated documentation like that can do for you is to help establish an earlier invention date if you do go on to file a patent, which can be used to claim priority over other filed applications.
I think you've misunderstood my point, we are in fact in agreement. I was referring to the idea of mailing yourself documentation on your ideas so that you could *in theory* demonstrate prior art if someone tried to patent something you had previously thought of.
This doesn't work however, since in order for the documentation to invalid the patent, the information must be available publicly before the patent was filed for.
The only thing that dated documentation like that can do for you is to help establish an earlier invention date if you do go on to file a patent, which can be used to claim priority over other filed applications.
If it's that important, then notarizing it would be better. There's absolutely no proof that what you mailed is what you currently have. A notary ledger is a legal record of a document, witnessed by a legally sanctioned public official.
TTFN
FAQ731-376
TTFN
FAQ731-376
So, say you come up with a great idea, but for whatever don't want to patent it. Could you, post it say on a fairly obscure website - for example an attachment to a post in one of the quieter Eng Tips forums.
If someone later comes to patent it could you claim prior art based on that post?
If someone later comes to patent it could you claim prior art based on that post?
Posting guidelines faq731-376 (probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484
I thought the US (which will allow you to patent pretty much anything and where patent lawyers are usually in for a percentage, as going to do something to make it easier for inventors to protect their ideas without having to commit to the whole patent deal until they were ready.
Anyone know anything about that?
JMW
Anyone know anything about that?
JMW
Irstuff that was my point, does it count as an adequately public venue that you could then later use the idea even if someone came up with it separately and patented it.
Posting guidelines faq731-376 (probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484
That is my point.
I'm not talking about coming back wanting to patent the idea. I'm saying if someone else patents the idea after you've posted, and then a few years later you actually want to use it, if you can show it was already 'public', albeit in a fairly obscure source then you don't have to worry about their patent.
I'm clearly doing a crap job of explaining my self here. Basically when you come up with the idea for some reason you don't want to patent it there an then. However, you'd like to be able to still use it if things change in a few years time and maybe you have the resources to commercialize it or something. I'm questioning if you could protect your ability to do this by having published the idea in an obscure place that no one else interested is likely to find it.
I'm not talking about coming back wanting to patent the idea. I'm saying if someone else patents the idea after you've posted, and then a few years later you actually want to use it, if you can show it was already 'public', albeit in a fairly obscure source then you don't have to worry about their patent.
I'm clearly doing a crap job of explaining my self here. Basically when you come up with the idea for some reason you don't want to patent it there an then. However, you'd like to be able to still use it if things change in a few years time and maybe you have the resources to commercialize it or something. I'm questioning if you could protect your ability to do this by having published the idea in an obscure place that no one else interested is likely to find it.
Posting guidelines faq731-376 (probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484
The basic point is that you have to have money to protect a patent or to challenge a patent.
So long as patents are seen as purely personal instruments then we will remain in the situation that big rich companies can be fairly cavalier with patent law and private individuals are going to get ripped off more often than not.
It might be a better idea if the patent office were obliged to protect the patents it awards and to treat any patents issued as being in the interests of the country or origination.
No one has deeper pockets than government organisations so in a p****ing contest many of the "so sue me" breaches would tend to fade away.
Of course, by the same token there might be expected to be a more rigorous review of applications.
The point here is that when some one breaks the law, the victim doesn't have to take the offender to court, the government does. The same ought to apply to patent infringements.
Like most such laws they are fairly long in the tooth and over the years have come to be little more than a little out of touch with reality.
I'd like to see the laws reviewed with the idea that it should be easier and a damn cite cheaper to obtain and maintain a reasonable patent. There might perhaps be some link between the fees and the revenues generated by the idea.
One reason why pharmaceuticals are so expensive is that they necessarily must patent the new drug as soon as possible but then a substantial proportion of the patent life is consumed in trials. This means that the drugs then have to recover the R&D costs and the costs of clinical trials over a shorter period. Perhaps we ought to see patent life extending from the date of first manufacture in some cases, if not all.
There is a great deal that ought to be looked at and reviewed.
Incidentally, one of the reasons why the UK shows such a high level of intellectual property and innovation is because the UK patent laws were seen as much more favourable to inventors. So much so that many inventors actually came to the UK not just to patent their ideas but also to manufacture.
This ought to be reason enough for an ambitious country to strengthen its laws and create some incentives.
JMW
So long as patents are seen as purely personal instruments then we will remain in the situation that big rich companies can be fairly cavalier with patent law and private individuals are going to get ripped off more often than not.
It might be a better idea if the patent office were obliged to protect the patents it awards and to treat any patents issued as being in the interests of the country or origination.
No one has deeper pockets than government organisations so in a p****ing contest many of the "so sue me" breaches would tend to fade away.
Of course, by the same token there might be expected to be a more rigorous review of applications.
The point here is that when some one breaks the law, the victim doesn't have to take the offender to court, the government does. The same ought to apply to patent infringements.
Like most such laws they are fairly long in the tooth and over the years have come to be little more than a little out of touch with reality.
I'd like to see the laws reviewed with the idea that it should be easier and a damn cite cheaper to obtain and maintain a reasonable patent. There might perhaps be some link between the fees and the revenues generated by the idea.
One reason why pharmaceuticals are so expensive is that they necessarily must patent the new drug as soon as possible but then a substantial proportion of the patent life is consumed in trials. This means that the drugs then have to recover the R&D costs and the costs of clinical trials over a shorter period. Perhaps we ought to see patent life extending from the date of first manufacture in some cases, if not all.
There is a great deal that ought to be looked at and reviewed.
Incidentally, one of the reasons why the UK shows such a high level of intellectual property and innovation is because the UK patent laws were seen as much more favourable to inventors. So much so that many inventors actually came to the UK not just to patent their ideas but also to manufacture.
This ought to be reason enough for an ambitious country to strengthen its laws and create some incentives.
JMW
btrueblood
Mechanical
Many interesting ideas there, jmw. Star from me.
BiPolarMoment
Mechanical
I'm going to go completely against the grain here: IP (e.g. patents) is bunk. If you don't want people to copy you, don't provide the means (i.e. don't tell anyone). Trying to stir the pot here and it seems no one had yet gone this direction ![[yinyang]](/data/assets/smilies/yinyang.gif "[yinyang] [yinyang]")
While it's true that if you tell no one and build nothing, then no one can steal anything from you. But, if someone else then produces your invention, without a patent you are without any paddle at all. If you produce something, you don't have to tell anyone anything, but when your competitors buy your product and reverse engineer it, again, without a patent you are without any paddle at all.
So why would that be a good approach?
TTFN
FAQ731-376
So why would that be a good approach?
TTFN
FAQ731-376
BiPolarMoment
Mechanical
Who is the person evaluating "good"? The inventor (pattern creator), the manufacturer (producer--possibly the same as the former), the user (consumer) or perhaps it is some utilitarian third party? I think it's obvious why answering this is important before anything can really be discussed.
I mean no disrespect by posing this line of thinking; I find it interesting to think about so I wanted to spur the conversation a little.
I mean no disrespect by posing this line of thinking; I find it interesting to think about so I wanted to spur the conversation a little.
Compositepro
Chemical
Trade secrets are a common and very well recognized alternative to patents. In some cases it is definitely preferable to a patent. Where the invention can be easily reverse engineered, it does not work.
But getting back to the original post where someone has an idea as a kid and now the invention exists with someone else getting the credit, my reaction is: so what? You are not an inventor. You did not reduce your idea to practice, so it was of no value. Everyone has ideas. There is little difference between an idea and a hallucination unless it results in something useful. I happen to think that anti-gravity would be very useful.
But getting back to the original post where someone has an idea as a kid and now the invention exists with someone else getting the credit, my reaction is: so what? You are not an inventor. You did not reduce your idea to practice, so it was of no value. Everyone has ideas. There is little difference between an idea and a hallucination unless it results in something useful. I happen to think that anti-gravity would be very useful.
![[thumbsup2]](/data/assets/smilies/thumbsup2.gif "[thumbsup2] [thumbsup2]")
![[peace]](/data/assets/smilies/peace.gif "[peace] [peace]")
BiPolarMoment
Mechanical
IRStuff: I was but people often argue for the utility of others..anyhow as it is off-topic I'll hold my tongue further. Maybe it's a pub topic?
Cheers
Cheers
My dad used to tell us that when he interviewed for a job with a manufacturer of adhesive bandages before WW2, he commented that the square ends that bandages had would catch and cause the bandage to peel off. He said that he took scissors and rounded the ends before putting them on. A few years later, the company started producing their bandages with rounded ends.
Simple observations and comments can make the difference to someone.
"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."
Ben Loosli
Simple observations and comments can make the difference to someone.
"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."
Ben Loosli
- Thread starter
- #39
By keeping them SECRET.
Copyrights are limited to works of authorship:
TTFN
FAQ731-376
Copyrights are limited to works of authorship:
TTFN
FAQ731-376
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question