The patentability of a design (shape) extends to every nuance, the size of the stripes, the number of stripes, even the curvature and size of the pick. Every feature must be shown in another reference, in complete detail. Apparently, no reference exactly like this toothpick exists. Show me a reference, and chances are, I can point out a difference between the reference and this pick, however small. On the other hand, to infringe, the infringing toothpick must be exactly the same as in this toothpick patent.
Do you think that in all of the detail in that claim, that ALL of those details are practiced by photographers in one particular setting ? That looks like a lot detail.
the claims define the invention, not the picture or some vague generalization of what anyone with a blog says they think the patent means: http://www.google.com/patents/US8676045
Did anyone commenting here consider that the toothpicks in the link from Michael (patent fool) Masnick has 3 indentations, and the design of the design patent shows 2 indentations.
Since design patents are limited to the exact design in the drawings of the design patent, there is a difference. Design patents protect the aesthetics of the shape, which includes every little difference.
Agreed. People wouldn't want their data encrypted if the U.S. gov't wasn't reading all of our communications trying to find incriminating information in the first place. Many people worry that their emails and phone calls criticizing gov't policy are stored somewhere and will be used by some presidential administration to audit their tax returns or put them under some special surveillance. The general surveillance of all electronic communications that is being conducted w/o any "probable cause" for a search warrant is just wrong and unconstitutional. These are private communications and not public communications, which requires a search warrant.
I know a retired chief petty officer from the Navy, who retired about 4 years ago, who told me, before Snowden's revelations "that all calls are recorded." The retired Navy guy has alluded to even greater extent of the surveilance.
Masnick - the most innovative software developers have the least to worry about being sued. It is the copycats that have the most to rejoice when they think they can't be sued for patent infringement.
Software should be a patentable for the same reasons that any invention should be patentable. I say this as a person whose has spent 18 years of his career as a software engineer for which one of my ideas back in the 1990's is now used by a lot of people.
Not really. What will happen is that the patent attorneys, all being engineers by training, will specialize in forensic discovery in divorce cases to uncover all the bad allegations from your spouse from your theft of the inventions of other programmers, and justice will finally be served against the invention thieves that congregate on this board. Ha ha ha !
Perhaps the patent attorneys should become divorce attorneys that specialize in divorce against people who have made a career out of stealing ideas from other programmers and laughed all the way to the bank until their spouse found out they were hiding their ill-gotten gains.
Be careful of what you hope for. Patent attorneys just might want to become divorce attorneys. Next thing you know, you get a petition for marital dissolution, you look up the attorney, and find out the attorney used to work in patents and is now asking the judge for all of your money and your business ownership. Good luck with that.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Trolls are a smokescreen
You need information on how judges deal with attorneys who overreach on damages claims. The bottom line is, it isn't pretty. Talk to a federal litigator for details.
If I were to make the rules, I would make minimum infringement much higher that the $1000 for which that company is suing consumers, such as at least $50,000, which I think would take away a lot of the fear of patents. That company is the poster child of abusive patent litigants. http://patent-counselors.com/?p=224
Yes, for a limited time (20 years), product competitors get to shut each other out of their inventions, it's been that way in England for almost 1000 years and always that way in the U.S. since the U.S. became a separate nation. If it makes you happy, the 2006 decision Ebay v. Merc prohibited injunctions by patent owners who do not make products in that industry, so they cannot enforce a monopoly.
Yes, the possibility that we could obtain some ROI in the event that a big computer company stole our inventions and put them in their own products and outsold us using their superior marketing and financial power was a factor in our original investment decision 6 years ago. Patents did help us put nearly a million $ in investment in our R&D over 5 years ago, so yes, patents were an incentive. As Pres. Lincoln said "the patent system added the fuel of interest to the fire of genius." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln%27s_patent. App developers wouldn't want patents because they have a short time horizon, but we were in this for the long haul.
BTW - read my other posts here, we do have sales; just atarted sales in 2014; but we are still worried about a large tech company squashing us with superior marketing and financial power. We are involved in voice control of The Internet of Things, and we know from CES that large companies have a huge interest in this market. If they could, they would reverse engineer everything for $100K and steal us blind. We have worked in the computer industry for a long time and have seen that happen to a lot of companies along the way.
My guess is that someone on this board wants big tech companies to steal the inventions of small companies. Where did you ever get the notion that the company with the best technology always wins in the marketplace ? There are many forums of competition; such as technology, marketing, finance and patents. Patent protection is written into the U.S. Constitution, but not technological innovation, marketing prowess or financial prowess.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Trolls are a smokescreen
Thanks for helping out against Masnick. Looks like we understand patents similar.
Masnick doesn't understand that patents are a different forum of competition, amoung other forums such as engineering, marketing and finance. He foolishly assumes that the best product wins the market, you know, like Microsoft Windows (ha ha !) He seems to have forgotten that if Microsoft hadn't given $250 mil to Apple in 1999, Apple would have gone under.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Trolls are a smokescreen
The gov't shouldn't be taxing real estate. And in fact, the gov't does tax patents by charging periodic maintenance fees.
But, I agree that the boundaries of patents are not as clear-cut as real estate. There is no database that one can use to definitely determine in a cost of a few hundred dollars that we are not infringing. And patents can overlap each other, much different than real estate. And that might be the one difference that causes so many anti-property rights people to hate patents.
I have noticed that the biggest rejection of patents is from left-wing anti-property rights people and from right-wing anti-competitive big company people. Politics does make strange bed-fellows.
Well Mr. Masnick - I will be damned if I tell you the name of my company considering your irrational hated-filled posts on this website. Last thing I need is to have you drag our company's name through the mud because we support patents and you hate patents. Yep, I am very concerned that some big company will take our good ideas and integrate them in to their products and use their better marketing and financial resources to quash us. Where did you ever get the idea that the company with the best products win in the marketplace? What planet are you from ?
We have a product that is being sold, as I said "We are just now starting sales" and we have 2 beta installations that have replaced competitors products that cost nearly $20K for each installation; with very good reviews, but which is all the more to fear that one of the large tech companies will steal our good ideas.
I think you are just a shill for the big tech companies in the Consumer Electronics Association. Whether you are a dupe or paid by them is immaterial, you are doing evil work for the CEA.
Anyway, Qualcomm is starting to fight back against those of you who support the theft of other people's good products.
I call BS on you idea that somehow good implementation of technical ideas automatically makes for success in the marketplace.
On the post: Design Patent Granted... On A Toothpick
Re: Re: Re: not just lines
On the post: US Patent Office Grants 'Photography Against A White Background' Patent To Amazon
Re: Re: "The Amazon Patent"
On the post: US Patent Office Grants 'Photography Against A White Background' Patent To Amazon
Re:
http://www.google.com/patents/US8676045
On the post: US Patent Office Grants 'Photography Against A White Background' Patent To Amazon
Re:
the claims define the invention, not the picture or some vague generalization of what anyone with a blog says they think the patent means: http://www.google.com/patents/US8676045
On the post: US Patent Office Grants 'Photography Against A White Background' Patent To Amazon
Re:
even though his registration indicates that law firm as his employer https://oedci.uspto.gov/OEDCI/details.do?regisNum=63007
You can read the communication that led to the issuance here: http://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair
Does anyone here understand that the part of the patent that is enforceable is the claims, which you can read here: http://www.google.com/patents/US8676045
The claims are quite a bit more detailed than "photograph against a a white background".
Before you complain, look up the patent.
On the post: Design Patent Granted... On A Toothpick
Re: not just lines
Since design patents are limited to the exact design in the drawings of the design patent, there is a difference. Design patents protect the aesthetics of the shape, which includes every little difference.
On the post: FBI Director Angry At Homebuilders For Putting Up Walls That Hide Any Crimes Therein
Re:
I know a retired chief petty officer from the Navy, who retired about 4 years ago, who told me, before Snowden's revelations "that all calls are recorded." The retired Navy guy has alluded to even greater extent of the surveilance.
On the post: Be Happy: Software Patents Are Rapidly Disappearing Thanks To The Supreme Court
On the post: Be Happy: Software Patents Are Rapidly Disappearing Thanks To The Supreme Court
On the post: Be Happy: Software Patents Are Rapidly Disappearing Thanks To The Supreme Court
Re: Finally some good news
On the post: Be Happy: Software Patents Are Rapidly Disappearing Thanks To The Supreme Court
Re:
On the post: Be Happy: Software Patents Are Rapidly Disappearing Thanks To The Supreme Court
Re: patent law
I bet you don't think that could ever happen.
On the post: History Repeats Itself: Patent Abusers Successfully Stymie Anti-Patent Troll Bill In The Senate
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Trolls are a smokescreen
On the post: History Repeats Itself: Patent Abusers Successfully Stymie Anti-Patent Troll Bill In The Senate
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Trolls are a smokescreen
On the post: History Repeats Itself: Patent Abusers Successfully Stymie Anti-Patent Troll Bill In The Senate
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Trolls are a smokescreen
On the post: History Repeats Itself: Patent Abusers Successfully Stymie Anti-Patent Troll Bill In The Senate
Re: Trolls are a smokescreen
On the post: History Repeats Itself: Patent Abusers Successfully Stymie Anti-Patent Troll Bill In The Senate
Re: Re: Re: Re: Trolls are a smokescreen
BTW - read my other posts here, we do have sales; just atarted sales in 2014; but we are still worried about a large tech company squashing us with superior marketing and financial power. We are involved in voice control of The Internet of Things, and we know from CES that large companies have a huge interest in this market. If they could, they would reverse engineer everything for $100K and steal us blind. We have worked in the computer industry for a long time and have seen that happen to a lot of companies along the way.
My guess is that someone on this board wants big tech companies to steal the inventions of small companies. Where did you ever get the notion that the company with the best technology always wins in the marketplace ? There are many forums of competition; such as technology, marketing, finance and patents. Patent protection is written into the U.S. Constitution, but not technological innovation, marketing prowess or financial prowess.
On the post: History Repeats Itself: Patent Abusers Successfully Stymie Anti-Patent Troll Bill In The Senate
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Trolls are a smokescreen
Masnick doesn't understand that patents are a different forum of competition, amoung other forums such as engineering, marketing and finance. He foolishly assumes that the best product wins the market, you know, like Microsoft Windows (ha ha !) He seems to have forgotten that if Microsoft hadn't given $250 mil to Apple in 1999, Apple would have gone under.
"Steve Jobs Used Patents to Get Bill Gates to Make 1997 Investment In Apple": http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericjackson/2012/03/01/steve-jobs-used-patents-to-get-bill-gates-to-make -1997-investment-in-apple/
On the post: History Repeats Itself: Patent Abusers Successfully Stymie Anti-Patent Troll Bill In The Senate
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Trolls are a smokescreen
But, I agree that the boundaries of patents are not as clear-cut as real estate. There is no database that one can use to definitely determine in a cost of a few hundred dollars that we are not infringing. And patents can overlap each other, much different than real estate. And that might be the one difference that causes so many anti-property rights people to hate patents.
I have noticed that the biggest rejection of patents is from left-wing anti-property rights people and from right-wing anti-competitive big company people. Politics does make strange bed-fellows.
On the post: History Repeats Itself: Patent Abusers Successfully Stymie Anti-Patent Troll Bill In The Senate
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Trolls are a smokescreen
We have a product that is being sold, as I said "We are just now starting sales" and we have 2 beta installations that have replaced competitors products that cost nearly $20K for each installation; with very good reviews, but which is all the more to fear that one of the large tech companies will steal our good ideas.
I think you are just a shill for the big tech companies in the Consumer Electronics Association. Whether you are a dupe or paid by them is immaterial, you are doing evil work for the CEA.
Anyway, Qualcomm is starting to fight back against those of you who support the theft of other people's good products.
I call BS on you idea that somehow good implementation of technical ideas automatically makes for success in the marketplace.
Next >>