Posted by ovyyus (203.26.14.3) on May 25, 2003 at 17:28:35:
In Reply to: Re: Lurker posted by Lurker on May 25, 2003 at 11:03:22:
Hi Lurker,
The patent office will accept any patent application provided that it is accompanied with the appropriate payment.
Whether or not the application makes it through to the granting of a full patent or not depends upon it not infringing an existing patent and, of course, payment of patent office fees.
With the exception of applications for PM machines the patent office does not specifically require proof that an invention actually works.
The patent office was designed to help protect the rights of the inventor, not filter good and bad inventions. It is no surprise then that many patents granted by the office do not necessarily function as well as the inventor claims, if at all.
Why do inventors patent things that don't work? It would seem that not all inventors see it as important to prove their invention with a working model. Sometimes an inventor feels their invention looks so convincing on paper they do not need a model - their priority is to protect their idea, not necessarily prove it. We see the same process at work here - inventors often seek protection before proof.
I find it difficult to believe that there is any dark undercurrect of suppression or misdirection when it comes to PM inventions. It's just not taken that seriously. It's easy to mistake a total lack of interest with suppression :)
IMO, 'men in black' are more interested in the business of screwing millions of pensioners out of their superannuation than they are in suppressing a non-existant technology.
Regards, ovyyus
: That's a VERY good question. Why go through all of the trouble and hassle of patenting something if it does not work? Remember too that patent offices supposedly require a working model of a device, or at least a solid theoretical expectation that the device will work, before a patent will be granted. The very fact that a patent has been granted would seem to give reason for expecting that the device will work.
: However, there is the possibility that something else is going on here as well. This is the concept of a "red herring". Disinformation, in other words. Let's say that you are a "bad" person who knows the secret of how these devices work, and you wish to keep this secret for yourself. One way of doing this is to give false hints about how the real working devices work. So, you create a bunch of bogus machines and patent them, with the help of some bribe money to the patent office, of course.
: We now have a situation where there are large numbers of patents of machines that do not work. As a result of this, thousands of inventors waste their time trying to build these machines, and after they have wasted all their time only to find that the machines do not work, they give up in frustration. This is exactly what the "bad" people want. Now, the "bad" people can have the working devices all to themselves, and everyone else believes that such devices are impossible.
: : I have to say here, SUPPOSEDLY most of these do not work,
: : but I admit too, why patent them if they don't?