New Patent law discussion thread

[nicbordeaux]

usual problem path_finder : unless the inventor can show a working model which undeniably puts out more than is put in , nobody is going to buy it.

[Jim Williams]

Obtaining a US patent to obtain personal ownership of a working wheel doesn't make any sense. Such a patent doesn't grant ownership to the inventor of such a wheel, but grants only the right for the inventor to exclude others from making, using or selling the invention throughout the US.

If memory serves, what obtaining a patent achieves is causing the invention itself to simultaneously become owned by humanity itself, with the single exception of that right to make, use or sell in the US; which, as a right, expires for the inventor after a maximum of 20 years.

When a patent is granted it's published by the Patent Office and is available in its entirety for free over in internet. After that maximum of 20 years, that invention becomes owned, free and clear, by everyone and anyone. In my opinion, it's actually the communal ownership of (intellectual) property by humanity, making the US patent system one of the purist forms of communism on the planet. Regardless of that, I think pursuing a patent on a Bessler's wheel is the way to go.

[Ealadha]

To pursue a patant on something you have the instructions for , do yous not see anything wrong with that !

[Jim Williams]

Whether or not Bessler uncovered a working device in his wheel, if one chances upon a means to achieve what Bessler claims he had, causing such an invention to become owned by humanity, I believe is a good result for the new inventor and Bessler's effort.

What one does with that period of 20 years during which a new inventor has the right to exclude others to the invention, is where a decision on how to honor Bessler's work can be made.

I see nothing wrong with patenting a working wheel even if it's based on Bessler's work, as it causes it to be owned by everyone free and clear forever. How one chooses to profit from the invention is something, giving Bessler as an example, even he could have done better for himself.

[nneba]

I'll decide

;)

[Jim Williams]

Bessler didn't have a choice, at least in terms of obtaining a US patent, as that patent office didn't exist yet.

But as it does now, would Bessler have chosen to; 1. cause his wheel to become owned by humanity and 2. since all US patents are published when issued, cause humanity to know what he did with his wheel himself?

[Ealadha]

I think we would not know today that the bessler wheel existed if the principle had have been disclosed to the world 300 years ago , because today there is so many things that have existed that hardly anyone knows about .
Those with the most gold write the history books .

[Jim Williams]

US patents available over the internet date back to 1790. If they dated back to 1690, perhaps Bessler's wheel would already be known. But they don't.

You may be right. Perhaps the US should have come to exist earlier. Then most likely the mystery wouldn't still exist.

[preoccupied]

In the USA now one year after publishing publicly something, something can be patented on what is published but other countries don't have the same law so will my patent be honored in those countries after the patent in the USA or could there even be a competing patent in a foreign country while I obey all of USA's laws?

[Jim Williams]

Jim_Mich knows more about this than I do, but obtaining a US patent only offers protection within the US. That is one reason US patented only prescription drugs can cost so much less in Canada. Canadians don't have to pay the same royalties, if any at all.

I don't know if competing patents can be issued in foreign countries, but since the inventions in US patents are published when issued, the invention will be known by everyone period and again US patent laws can only be applied within the US.

[jim_mich]

Under the America Invents act if I share something here is it then prior art?

Yes, any postings become prior art.

With the previous US patent law, you could post something and then if you were the original inventor and if you filed within one year you could get a US patent. But you could not get a patent in most other countries that had 'first to file' laws.

This is now changing. The US is switching over to 'first to file'. This means there is no longer the one year grace period. This change over will take about 18 months.

The 'first to file' does not give anyone the right to rip off an inventor. You still need to be the inventor, or have the legal rights to the invention. A company that hires someone to invent something can file for a patent.

Previously, an employee of a company might invent something for the company, but then may have left the company to work elsewhere. This left the company in an awkward position if the former employee failed to cooperate in filing for the patent.

'First to file' simply means that when two people file applications for basically the same idea, the one who files first gets the patent. Previously such a patent would go to the one who first thought up the invention and made it work and filed within one year. This caused some problems with proving who conceived of the idea first. Good inventors (and companies) keep invention notebooks where ideas and progress are written down, dated, and witnessed. This was proof of when an idea was first conceived and made to work. But now that is changed because the first one to file gets the patent.

-----

If an invention is patented and published in one country, but is not patented in some other country, then is can be made, sold, and used in that other countries.

There are patent treaties between most countries that allow patent applications to be filed first in one's own country and then be filed up to a year later in the other countries, with the whole process taking as much as 30 months time. This can get very expensive. Many times an invention is not worth the patent cost in some smaller countries.

[jim_mich]

I'd like to add, you still need to be the inventor (or have rights to the invention) in order to get a patent. For instance, if you hire a machinist to make parts for your invention, then the machinist cannot rush to the patent office ahead of you and get a patent on your idea. If you prove that the machinist derived his invention from you then you get the patent because he stole your idea.

But if two people come up with the same idea independently, then the first to file gets the patent.

So what about Bessler's wheel? We all have read the same clues. We all have access to the same documents. Many members have similar ideas for wheels. It would seem that the first person to file an application and to also demonstrate a working perpetual motion wheel would get a patent. This assumes that the patent office does not issue a suppression order. But the way around that is to first file a very well written patent application and to then publicly disclose how such a wheel can be made and how it works. This would prevent the suppression order from suppressing the invention.

Since Bessler never publicly disclosed how his wheel worked, there is nothing in any of his writings to prevent a working perpetual motion wheel from getting a patent. One can speculate that a PM wheel is the same as Bessler's, but since no one knows what was inside Bessler's wheel, there is nothing to stop the patent office from issuing a patent, as long as what you describe in the application actually works.

[Timothy]

With the previous US patent law, you could post something and then if you were the original inventor and if you filed within one year you could get a US patent. But you could not get a patent in most other countries that had 'first to file' laws.

Does this affect a provisional patent?

[jim_mich]

I don't know. I'm still learning.

America Invents Act: Analysis by David Pressman

[Timothy]

"The new regime will put a premium on earlier and more frequent patent application filings. Under prior practice, an applicant could "swear behind" an earlier application filed by another by submitting an affidavit with corroborating evidence to the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO), in order to establish an actual date of invention earlier than the filing date of the other application. This practice of swearing behind earlier-filed applications will no longer be available. Thus, we expect more widespread use of provisional patent applications to quickly establish an effective filing date. Provisional applications have been available since 1994, but they will assume greater importance. Provisional filings are comparatively less expensive and time-consuming than non-provisional applications because they do not need to meet the claiming requirements and other formalities of a non-provisional application. Provisional patent applications do require full technical disclosure, however. To take full advantage of these types of applications, and to file them quickly, start-up companies and those companies whose products are in an early development phase will need to dedicate more resources to patent protection and dedicate those resources earlier in the process." (Hughes Hubbard: New Patent Law, Sept 30, 2011)

I guess it means there will be more of them filed, but they must still be honored.