The Cyber-Spy.Com Usenet Archive Feeds Directly
From The Open And Publicly Available Newsgroup
This Group And Thousands Of Others Are Available
On Most IS NNTP News Servers On Port 119.
Cyber-Spy.Com Is NOT Responsible For Any Topic,
Opinions Or Content Posted To This Or Any Other
Newsgroup. This Web Archive Of The Newsgroup And
Posts Are For Informational Purposes Only.
From: James Beck
Subject: Re: Overbroad Patent.
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 08:24:04 -0400
Organization: RKS, Inc.
References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>
X-Server-Date: 26 Sep 2002 12:25:03 GMT
X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.30
In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
> "Rich Grise" wrote in message
> > ...
> > This reminds me of a story in some newspaper or magazine that my Dad
> > out to me 30 or 40 years ago - some guy accidentally patented the
> > His actual invention was handles that could pivot when you want to
> dump the
> > wheelbarrow; presumably the wheelbarrow itself has been so obvious
> for so
> > many thousands of years that there was no prior art on the
> wheelbarrow itself.
> > Cheers!
> > Rich
> > "We have met the enemy, and he is us." - Pogo Possum, ca. 1950's
> I think I remember that patent, it annoyed me so much at the time. I
> believe it was
> the "ballbarrow" where the conventional wheel was replaced with a ball
> of similar
> diameter. The claim was to do with larger load area when used on soft
> while having a small load area and therefore less drag when on harder
> I believe this was patented by Dyson, of vacuum cleaner fame (I lived
> a few miles from his factory at the time).
I don't think you properly understand the "Prior Art" statement.
Prior art just means it had been done before, not patented before. In
fact, if you are trying to bust a patent finding unpatented prior art is
exactly what you are looking for. It shows it had been done (prior art)
and the person that made it didn't seek patent protection, so you are
free and clear. There are a crap load of areas that the Patent Office is
WAAAYYYYYY too lenient in giving patents, mainly because they don't have
the people qualified to judge the applications. How about companies that
patent gene sequences that occur in humans......I can give about 6
billion examples of prior art, but the patent still gets granted.
Go Back To The Cyber-Spy.Com
Usenet Web Archive Index Of
The sci.electronics.design Newsgroup