New Way To Build A Snowman: Patented!

from the the-following-is-not-a-joke dept

Fri, Sep 23rd 2011 10:32am — Mike Masnick

In showing the ridiculousness of the patent system, there are a few patents that stand out that get cited pretty often. Among them are Patent #6,004,596 on making a peanut butter and jelly sandwich without the crust, patent #6,368,227 showing a method of swinging on a swing sideways and patent #5,443,036 explaining a method for "exercising a cat" by pointing a laser pointer and "selectively redirecting said beam out of the cat's immediate reach to induce said cat to run and chase said beam and pattern of light around an exercise area."

I think we may have another one to add to that list. Prisoner 201 lets us know that the USPTO, in their infinite wisdom, has granted a patent on building a snowman. Because, lord knows, without that, no one would have any incentive at all to make a snowman. I will admit that the patent does discuss a rather different way of making a snowman, involving "snow spheres." But I do wonder if this is the proper use of the patent system. Anyway, go ahead and check out patent # 8,011,991 for inventor Ignacio Marc Asperas of Melville, NY, which is technically for an "Apparatus for facilitating the construction of a snow man/woman." The patent itself declares: "The following is not a joke patent. Its completely serious and is a serious undertaking to obtain a patent."

I don't know. Something tells me that when you need to declare in the patent itself that it is not a joke patent... chances are... it is. I have to say that the description part of the patent is a fun read that made me laugh out loud multiple times. Here's the opening paragraph:

The history of the snow man or snow woman is unknown. But, I have to say this. Whoever the first person was to think to form snow into a human figure was a genius. For untold years thereafter, children and adults alike have been thrilled and received joy in making and watching others make snowmen, err women. You know what I mean. At any rate, what is remarkable is that no one has ever thought, or at least reduced to practice, a way to make snow people easy and fun. I have done an abbreviated patent search and there is nothing relating to the subject of creating a snowman. Unbelievable since it is so much fun and considering the effort involved. But, if no one has thought of it, well, no one has thought of it.

My favorite line from the description may be the following:

[W]e are living in the 21st century now. We have created the Internet. China is getting ready to send a person to the moon. And we invented silly putty, perhaps one of the all-time greatest inventions a big kid ever invented. Can't somebody build a better snow man?

Later, he wonders if his snowman will be "as revolutionary" as the wheel. Either way, whether you like the patent system or not, this is a pretty fun patent to read, and the description part explains a lot more than the almost unintelligible claims on the patent, with this one being the main one:

1. A building component apparatus for facilitating a construction of a snow man/woman, comprising: a spherically-shaped body that provides an interior structure of the snow man/woman that has an outer surface and an interior, the interior substantially lighter than when the interior is filled with snow; an adhesion surface provided on the outer surface of the spherically-shaped body that substantially increases the ability of the outer surface to adhere snow to the spherically-shaped body; wherein, the spherically-shaped body and adhesion surface form a building component for facilitating the construction of the snow man/woman; and a generator that generates an electric charge, the electric charge coupled to the outer surface.

Anyway, with winter approaching for many of us, please be careful in building any snowmen using this approach. You may be willful infringers. I'm sure patent system supporters would tell you to go out and come up with your own damn way of building a snow man, you damn copycats.

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: patents, snowmen

53 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Scooters (profile), 23 Sep 2011 @ 10:45am

I'm suing this patent!
I have the patent for making snow, and this bastard has yet to send me a dime for my innovative approach of freezing water in cold temperatures.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chuck Norris' Enemy (deceased) (profile), 23 Sep 2011 @ 10:50am

Patent check
I'm wondering if anybody has patented a bucket...you know...for making sandcastles. Or cookie cutters for that matter.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jeffrey Nonken (profile), 23 Sep 2011 @ 11:06am

All I can say is...
http://www.angelfire.com/wa/zzaran/images/Hitbycar.gif
[ link to this | view in thread ]
hat_eater, 23 Sep 2011 @ 11:14am

"A technique of printing text messages on suitably prepared surfaces made of solidified water flakes using a 0,9% urea solution warmed to 98,6 degrees F. and a hand activated application tool."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Tom Bowler, 23 Sep 2011 @ 11:14am

I call dibs on make a snow ball in something a like to call "the Snowball fight"tm (C) The question is who to unleash the lawyers at.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bengie, 23 Sep 2011 @ 11:29am

Re:
Printing?! I like to use cursive.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Sep 2011 @ 11:32am

Re: All I can say is...
One of my favorites...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Sep 2011 @ 11:32am

I'm sure patent system supporters would tell you to go out and come up with your own damn way of building a snow man, you damn copycats.

Ha ha ha! Scraping the bottom of the barrel trying to spread IP FUD. Unfortunately, I'm sure a patented drug will save your life one day, chubby.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Sep 2011 @ 11:35am

is that a man?!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Sep 2011 @ 11:35am

Re: Patent check
Well, if no one has thought of it, then no one has thought of it...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jimr (profile), 23 Sep 2011 @ 11:36am

I think Frost is considered prior art. Maybe he should come to life and kick her a**.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Richard (profile), 23 Sep 2011 @ 11:44am

A truly new method of making a snowman
During the miner's strike in Britain (winter 1984) Some pickets were on duty outside a powerstation. They built a snowman that blocked the road - the police came along and demolished it by drigving a Range Rover through it.

The next day the miners built another snowman in the middle of the road - only this time they built it around a bollard!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
point.vector (profile), 23 Sep 2011 @ 11:45am

Hey Mike, how is it that one can patent something thats been done a thousand times? I just don't understand. Like how Apple patented the rectangle with rounded edges for the iphone...how is this possible?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Richard (profile), 23 Sep 2011 @ 11:47am

Re: A truly new method of making a snowman
link here
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5847315.ece
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Sep 2011 @ 11:54am

Mike, all kidding aside, this is exactly the basis of a very valid patent, and also proves that there is more than one way to accomplish an end result. While you are trying very hard to play the humor up, the reality is that it is using a unique method, I don't think very many of us have considered using electricity to build a snowman.

Too bad that you can't see it for what it really is, proof that your objections to the patent system are mostly unfounded.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Sep 2011 @ 11:59am

Re:
Because he apparently devised a support structure over which snow many be placed, even dry snow. How do you make a snowman using only dry snow? Read the patent. It is not only entertaining, but shows what the gentleman has done as being more than just building an ordinary snowman.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Sep 2011 @ 12:01pm

Re:
*cough*troll*cough*
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Sep 2011 @ 12:04pm

Re:
True, but that will not stop persons from trying to use it as an example of all that is wrong with patents.

I was surprised to learn that one can construct, using the claimed apparatus, a snowman using dry/powder snow.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Gracey (profile), 23 Sep 2011 @ 12:10pm

Uh, could somebody explain the instructions? Geeze if a kid had to follow those to build a snowman...where's the fun?

Let's see...make a snowball, roll in snow. Pile two or three on top of each other. Voila. Snowman.

What the hell does that guy's instructions say?

While it may be "valid" how many people would use that method to build a snowman? Certainly no kid I know would be interested, and neither would most adults. Half the fun is in the snowballs.

There's plenty of ways to build a snowman...using electricity isn't high on my list of "must dos".

One of our local groups built a snowman using a lot of recycled plastic lunchables containers...I'm pretty sure they didn't patent it. Anybody want to take a stab?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Sep 2011 @ 12:17pm

Re: Re:
You are correct. It's actually a very interesting deal because on the surface, it seems like nothing, but in reality, is actually a fairly complex method that, even someone skilled in the art of making a snowman might not immediately grasp, because it goes against common wisdom in snowman making.

I guess I shouldn't be shocked that Mike is in such a rush to slam the patent system that he didn't bother to actually read it. I guess I am not surprised that his minions are falling for his crap too on this one.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Gracey (profile), 23 Sep 2011 @ 12:20pm

Re: Re:
[How do you make a snowman using dry snow?]

Uh, dump a bucket of water on a pile of dry snow. Yay...snow for a snowman.

Okay, yes he obviously had to go to some work and testing to set up something like the method used in the patent, but this is not something most people would even consider doing.

On the other hand, I live in a place where there is more than enough snow during the winter to build a suitable snowman...thousands of them, without worrying about dry snow. How would he know which method you used?

So even though the patent may actually have some validity, it does seem a little on the silly side. How is the patent even enforceable in terms of use? People build snowmen, mostly kids. Is this guy going to deconstruct every snowman that "might" have used his patent?

He'd be better of patenting the "kit" along with the method. Then he can sell the "kits" with the instructions and be all set.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Randy S, 23 Sep 2011 @ 12:50pm

Tainted PB&J
"Patent #6,004,596 on making a peanut butter and jelly sandwich without the crust"

It seems that Smucker's stole this idea for their Uncrustables!! The dirty jelly conglomerate can't even leave the poor PB&J alone. Something needs to be done about this travesty. I can't even think straigh, this makes me so upset. I guess I will go out back and swing sideways!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Karl (profile), 23 Sep 2011 @ 12:52pm

Yeah, I don't think so...
Anyway, with winter approaching for many of us, please be careful in building any snowmen using this approach.

Having just read the patent, I can say with confidence that the chance of anyone "using this approach" is zero.

You have a kind of skeleton that looks like a snowman, then use a continuous electrical charge on its surface to make the snow stick to it.

Basically, you're creating a Snow Terminator. Except instead of threatening you with an Austrian accent, it zaps your kids every time they touch it.

It's not so much a stupid patent, as it is a stupid idea.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
tebee (profile), 23 Sep 2011 @ 12:56pm

But why did he do it ?
I fail to see anyway making a better snowman is going to lead to life of fame and riches - or even how he is going to make any money this invention at all.

So why did me go to the effort and expense of doing this ? Is it for the notoriety of having patented something or is like the people who join Mensa because they have not done anything with their lives.

Or is it just that I'm missing some wonderful business opportunity that he has the vision to see?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hobbs, 23 Sep 2011 @ 1:06pm

Re: All I can say is...
You started it.
http://www.google.com/imgres?q=calvin+%26+hobbes+cannonball&hl=en&client=firefox-a& hs=WeX&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&biw=1400&bih=887&tbm=isch&tbnid=73Vi8_pV-m 2MvM:&imgrefurl=http://www.aaronhatcher.com/Photos/Calvin_and_Hobbes/index.htm&docid=WMLOw_G xVKEyEM&w=584&h=190&ei=ZOZ8TtSELYPfsQLLne0R&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=853&vpy=2 57&dur=993&hovh=64&hovw=196&tx=134&ty=54&page=1&tbnh=64&tbnw=196& ;start=0&ndsp=24&ved=1t:429,r:4,s:0
[ link to this | view in thread ]
timlash (profile), 23 Sep 2011 @ 1:06pm

What about snow pets?!
Mike, eschewing the label of a journalist, as you are quick to do, does not excuse you from neglecting to mention that the patent also covers snow kitty and puppy variants. This could be important to some readers who wish to avoid infringing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Sep 2011 @ 1:36pm

Come on, we all know you make a snow man by putting a pumpkin on a 1x1x2 meter snow block.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Grey Ferret, 23 Sep 2011 @ 1:40pm

Re: But why did he do it ?
I don't think you understand how the patent system works. He isn't trying to make money off an invention. That's not what patents are about. He's planning to make money off the patent itself. The invention is nothing more than a means in which to to obtain the patent.

Now that he has been granted the patent. And thanks to the ridiculous nature of it, a bunch of free publicity as well. He may now look at opportunities to either sell or sue. There are plenty of trolls out there amassing arsenals of patents who may be interested in buying his patent. Or, there may be someone out there (think winter entertainment park, or cold-climate research facility, or whatever) that may come up with a similar idea independently which he will now be able to sue.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Incoherent One (profile), 23 Sep 2011 @ 1:45pm

Re: Re: Re:
I have been making snowmen in the Sierra Nevada for years with my kids. Most of the snow at the cabin(less the first or late spring storm) is very dry powder and does not lend itself to making snowmen easily, but alas my kids and I figured it out years ago.

Does this patent meant that I should be careful of posting my dry snowmen on my facebook page since I may fringe on this morons patent?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Incoherent One (profile), 23 Sep 2011 @ 1:46pm

Re: Tainted PB&J
Only applies if those were actually made of bread. My kids have brought those home from school before. No wonder kids are getting fat. Those things are god awful.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Sep 2011 @ 2:11pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
No, only if you are using a wire frame and electricity to make them. Read the patent, will you?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
jack of all trades, 23 Sep 2011 @ 2:11pm

Re: Re:
I just read through it... I think it is a legit and a smart invention.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Sep 2011 @ 2:16pm

Re: Re: Re:
You are correct. It's actually a very interesting deal because on the surface, it seems like nothing, but in reality, is actually a fairly complex method that, even someone skilled in the art of making a snowman might not immediately grasp, because it goes against common wisdom in snowman making.

I guess I shouldn't be shocked that Mike is in such a rush to slam the patent system that he didn't bother to actually read it. I guess I am not surprised that his minions are falling for his crap too on this one.

Exactly. This patent is actually clever, and the state of the art of snowman making has been advanced. Of course, Pirate Mike has to FUD this out. Sadly, it's all he knows.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Sep 2011 @ 2:36pm

Re: Yeah, I don't think so...
It's not so much a stupid patent, as it is a stupid idea.

It is kind of stupid, but that doesn't mean the patent system is stupid--which seems to be Pirate Mike's point. As long as the criteria of Title 35 are met (101, 102, 103, 112, etc.), then a patent should issue. If the invention is stupid, that's for the market to decide, not the law. You'd think an ivy league-educated guy like Mike'd understand this, but I'm guessing he was in the bottom half of his class.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 23 Sep 2011 @ 3:04pm

Re: Re: Re:
Actually, I think this is a completely valid and interesting patent. And amusing. It's a patent for a device (and a pretty ingenious one), not a method, so he is in fact patenting a "kit" of sorts.

He didn't patent "building a snowman."

Besides, there is nothing illegal or infringing about doing something on your own that someone else has patented. You just can't sell it, that's all.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 23 Sep 2011 @ 3:07pm

Re:
The patent describes a device -- essentially a ball with a Van deGraff generator inside -- that allows snow to stick to it, so you end up snow-covered ball that weighs less than a solid snowball and is easier to build a large snowman with.

It is not a patent on building snowmen.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 23 Sep 2011 @ 3:11pm

Re: But why did he do it ?
I fail to see anyway making a better snowman is going to lead to life of fame and riches - or even how he is going to make any money this invention at all.

Oh, I dunno. Priced right, I'd absolutely buy this! Maybe $20/sphere would be about right, if the spheres were large. I'd have great fun building 10' tall snowmen.

I think that's the appeal. As the patent application says, this is a toy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Sep 2011 @ 3:18pm

Re: Re: Re:
His patent does not cover a method of making a snowman. It covers only a device useful for making a snowman.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mike Masnick (profile), 23 Sep 2011 @ 5:10pm

Re: Re: Yeah, I don't think so...
You'd think an ivy league-educated guy like Mike'd understand this, but I'm guessing he was in the bottom half of his class.

Heh. If you must know, graduated second in my class and got to represent the school at graduation. But, eh, facts. Not your strong suit.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mike Masnick (profile), 23 Sep 2011 @ 5:11pm

Re: Re: Re: Yeah, I don't think so...
Oh, and considering that you went absolutely ballistic the other day for not fact checking properly, I assume that you will now apologize for not fact checking where in my class I graduated.

Or not.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Sep 2011 @ 7:50pm

Re: Re: Re: Yeah, I don't think so...
Well, good for you, chubby!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Sep 2011 @ 8:00pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Yeah, I don't think so...
Oh, and considering that you went absolutely ballistic the other day for not fact checking properly, I assume that you will now apologize for not fact checking where in my class I graduated.

Or not.

I said: "but I'm guessing he was in the bottom half of his class." Clearly, I was indicating a guess and not a fact, so your point (like so many of your points) completely misses the mark. Doh! Chubby swings and misses!

That's a whole different ball of wax than you purporting to state as fact that Deadline.com was suing for infringement over news stories, when in fact they were suing for infringement over source code that was copied verbatim.

The only thing worse than you making that mistake (a mistake that 2 minutes of research would have prevented, i.e., you should have done even the most basic and minimum of research into what their arguments actually were before writing a whole article about how dumb their arguments were) is the fact that you won't admit that you even made a mistake. An intellectually dishonest act through and through, chubby. Good on ya!

And funny how you don't actually address the point I made, which is that the market will decide how stupid this patent is, not the Patent Office or the courts.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Incoherent One (profile), 23 Sep 2011 @ 9:05pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
From a photograph, if built properly, how is one supposed to see said substructure?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Sep 2011 @ 12:06am

Dry snow doesn't stick well enough to make snowmen. Giant snowmen are hard to make because the snowballs are huge.

What do these two problems have in common? We've been solving them for decades by putting a basketball in the freezer then blowing it up tight, misting it with a sprayer, rolling it in the snow, and repeating over and over again.

Kudos to the guy who posted the Calvin and Hobbes snowmen link. Totally opened my mind. I'm going to have a ton of fun with snowmen this winter!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Sep 2011 @ 6:10am

Re: Re: Re: Yeah, I don't think so...
Oh Mike, I have to bow down to the other AC on this one, he nailed you good.

"guessing" is one of those weasel words, you know, the sort of thing you pepper many of your stories / opinions / unresearched posts with. He didn't have to be right, because he isn't wrong. He was guessing, nothing more. Where you finished doesn't matter, and there is no way to correct it, because it was just a guess. He isn't a journalist, he is just a guy making comments. If you want an accurate news report, don't come to blog, right?

"As a result of his posts, is it possible that Mike Masnick graduated at the bottom of his class?"

See? I didn't state anything, I just opened it up for discussion.

As a side note, I don't see you apologizing for failing to read or understand the patent you worked so hard to slam. That makes it your turn to say something nice.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Sep 2011 @ 6:31am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Yeah, I don't think so...
As a side note, I don't see you apologizing for failing to read or understand the patent you worked so hard to slam. That makes it your turn to say something nice.

Don't hold your breath. Pirate Mike saw an opportunity to slam patent law and took it. The details are inconsequential--it's all about the IP FUD, not facts.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
hmm (profile), 24 Sep 2011 @ 7:25am

Re:
Noticed how you used the word "chubby"...when in doubt of your own arguments fling insults eh?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mr. Oizo, 24 Sep 2011 @ 7:40am

Re:
I'm also sure that patented drug would have been cheaper if there was competition on the production of that drug.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Sep 2011 @ 8:46am

Re: Re:
Noticed how you used the word "chubby"...when in doubt of your own arguments fling insults eh?

In doubt? Hardly. I use insults because Pirate Mike has them coming. Look, I know chubby is a smart dude. From time to time he writes something that strikes me as genuinely insightful... sometimes even brilliant. That's why I give him grief about writing FUD like this that panders to the intellectually challenged. He's better than this. Or at least, he should want to be.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Sep 2011 @ 8:48am

Re: Re:
I'm also sure that patented drug would have been cheaper if there was competition on the production of that drug.

What drug company is going to spend millions on research and development if everyone else can just sell a generic version of it right away? It's the age-old free rider problem.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
aikiwolfie (profile), 25 Sep 2011 @ 7:08am

Fill in the form and pay the money!
What these patents demonstrate is that anything can be patented if you fill in the form correctly and pay the money. Now who's patented blogging? Seriously that's got to be more lucrative than a temporary snow person.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Sep 2011 @ 7:51am

Re: Fill in the form and pay the money!
There is no form to fill out. There are requirements that must be adhered to in preparing a patent application for submittal, but the content of virtually every original patent application (I say "original" because a patent application can for various reasons later be divided into a plurality of applications...though all would expire on the same date as the original as a general rule) is unique because one always starts with a blank sheet of paper. In fact, experience informs me that a patent application is easily one of the very most difficult legal documents to prepare because there is no "boilerplate" language one can simply lift from a "form book".

There are quite likely things much more lucrative than a business built around apparatus helpful for making a snowman or other snow figure, but long ago I learned that what seems almost certainly a loser in the marketplace sometimes surprises even the most ardent cynic.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
home, 5 Apr 2014 @ 11:29am

Gmail
Good HTTP church FBI
[ link to this | view in thread ]