Would A Patent's Title Be Classified?
from the just-wondering... dept
Ira writes in to point us to a patent application on a sort of weapons device, where the title of the patent is listed solely as "Classified." It would be interesting if some patent attorneys in the crowd could weigh in on this. If the purpose of the patent system is to distribute knowledge, then you would think a classified patent doesn't make much sense -- but this is even odder, in that it's the title, not the patent itself (which is for some sort of weapon), that is "classified." It could be that the inventor himself (Peter Lockhart) set the title as "classified" but that doesn't make much sense either. Anyone know what's going on here?Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: classified, patents
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well, for one, it's not actually "classified"
However, the fact that it has taken over 4 years for this application to publish was curious to me, so I checked its file wrapper on PAIR. It appears that the U.S. Army had originally placed a secrecy order on this application. That secrecy order was lifted on September 19, 2007, likely as a consequence of the PTO issuing a notice of allowance only a few weeks earlier.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bunker Buster
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
All I know...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Could have been classified then abandoned.
Nifty idea though, I wonder if it would work or not?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Here's my guess. Back in the 60's there was a country folk rock band called the Byrds. They released an album called "Untitled." Why was it released with that name? Because of a mistake. The label asked what the title of the new album was and the answer was that it was still untitled, which is exactly what the nimrod from the label wrote down.
Fast forward to 1972 and the label asked the band the Electric Light Orchestra for the name of the new album and received no answer. So that's what the nimrod from the label wrote down. Some other nimrod actually thought that "No Answer" was the name of the album, so that's how it was released.
In other words, I think the name of this patent was a mistake. I think initially and internally it was classified but the word was mistakenly not taken out when it was filed with the patent office. And via other nimrods the name stuck.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Presumably this mistake will be rectified if the application ever issues as a patent. Until then the mistake is a somewhat humorous anamoly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Title of Application
It was eventually declassified and published as US2008/0047450, but patent applications are published as filed, so the title remained "Classified" in the published application.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Title of Application
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Classified Patent Applications
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Classified Patent Applications
But, in order to know if a patent is of "classified" work, there not only have to be enough people to examine patents, but also enough people who know everything that is classified who do nothing but examine patents.
This doesn't sound like it can be true.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Classified Patent Applications
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Patent labeled "Classified"
I think it might be good if we had some sort of checks and balances (this is a democracy, isn't it? I sometimes wonder).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Patent labeled "Classified"
It is not at all unusual for a secrecy order to remain in place for many years, with the longest I have seen being about 30 or so. However, secrecy orders by law do have to be renewed by the USG every year, and failing to do so an applicant is entitled to have his/her application proceed to issue. It is also noteworthy that applications under secrecy order can also be filed in foreign patent offices that have reciprocal agreements established with the USG.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]