
US Patent system so dysfunctional you can patent a stick from a tree - lotusleaf1987
http://www.google.com/patents?id=hhYJAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q&f=false
======
ck2
We need to sponsor that image as a billboard in Washington D.C. to get the
mainstream news to cover it and then maybe Congress to look at it eventually.

~~~
drndown2007
Anyone have any idea how much it would cost? I'm in for $100 or more

~~~
civilian
Estimates here: [http://www.bluelinemedia.com/billboard-advertising-
media_13....](http://www.bluelinemedia.com/billboard-advertising-
media_13.html)

------
jws
Check the last two pages. It only took 4 years for a re-examination to cancel
all 20 claims.

~~~
wisty
Fantastic. Only four years in which anyone throwing a stick to a dog could be
creditably threatened with a patent suit.

My gut says that the threat would be hollow, but my gut says a lot of things.
Like that "1-Click" is too obvious to patent - all you need is a requirement
"reduce the number of steps a user needs to place a purchase order", and
that's the logical conclusion. Can you tell me if 1-click patents are valid?

If anything can be patented (if not actually defended), and patent threats
(even hollow ones) are an obstacle to new businesses, how is the patents
system encouraging innovation?

I know pg advises to ignore other companies patents completely (though you
should file a few of your own), and worry about the flack when you have
something to lose, but that doesn't mean the system isn't crap.

~~~
RyanMcGreal
> all you need is a requirement "reduce the number of steps a user needs to
> place a purchase order", and that's the logical conclusion.

That's it - my new goal is to invent and patent the Zero-Click Purchase.

You read it here first.

~~~
eftpotrm
Slashdot described the method and benefits for this many years ago, so could
be cited as prior art.

~~~
Symmetry
My college dorm's Laundry webservers were slashdotted but someone was still
able to come along later, patent the idea, and try to sue us.

~~~
eftpotrm
... which is just another example of that which has long been implemented (and
sometimes long been patented) still managing to attract protection. However,
at least when there is a significant pre-established publication of the idea
the 'try to' becomes rather more significant than the 'sue' and they can be
got rid of rather more easily.

~~~
Symmetry
Yes, and really it wasn't much of a problem for us. The company still has a
monopoly on the laundry-webserver business, though, and overcharges other
people horribly.

~~~
eftpotrm
Hmm. If this sort of thing is happening with any regularity the other side of
this argument is that there needs to be a clearer, simpler way for patents to
be struck down. If it's not valid for one it's not valid for any and any other
position is dangerously close to extortion.

------
alexqgb
Meanwhile, back in Washington, the Administration continues to bloviate about
other nations, and their "failures to respect intellectual property law".

At what point are those nations going to lose enough patience to point out the
unbelievable corruption, cynicism, and mind-bending incompetence with which
the law is administered in the first place?

~~~
throwaway8487
>> unbelievable corruption

Any proof?

~~~
steveklabnik
Every time Mickey Mouse is about to go out of copyright, the term mysteriously
gets extended...

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mickey_mouse_law>

~~~
bioh42_2
There is nothing mysterious about it. This is what I call "legal corruption".
Lobbying is fully within the law of the land. It may not be _right_ but it is
legal.

Unfortunately I don't see a way of changing this. Not within a republic with a
representative government. And I don't see America switching to Swiss style
direct democracy either.

(Americans seem to have a reflex to Goodwin any thread as soon as someone
mentions "direct democracy", please don't today. And please do read up on how
a certain someone actually got to power.)

The only hope I see is technology (Pirate Bay!) not to "fix" copyright and
patent law, but simply to make their enforcement less effective.

~~~
alexqgb
The issue isn't lobbying per se. After all, you can't have a viable
representative government if you're not allowed to talk to your
representatives (or petition them, as the Constitution puts it).

At the same time, you can't expect those same lawmakers to govern effectively
if they feel their re-election prospects hinge less on the will of the voters,
and more on the value of campaign donations provided by the very industries
they're supposed to govern.

A lot of people dislike the idea of public election finance, since they don't
want 'their' tax dollars going towards 'candidates they don't like' (as if
taxation depends on liking each and every thing the government does). But as
sharper wits have observed, you pay no matter what.

Moreover, you pay a _lot_ more for the corrupt alternative. Exhibit A is the
bazillions of dollars spent bailing out the most politically influential
banks, while protecting their shareholders from any major losses and shielding
fraudulent managers from richly deserved criminal investigations.

In retrospect, a few publicly-financed elections for one-one thousandth the
cost of 2008/09 would have been an exceptionally good value. Extra added
bonus: not cratering the global economy. Extra extra bonus: Patent Reform that
doesn't die every time it hits the Senate floor.

It's one thing for third-world kleptocracies to run themselves into the ground
(see Tunisia). But when the largest, most consequential economy on the planet
starts operating in the same way, it's a serious problem.

------
bmr
Obligatory exercise your cat with a laser pointer patent:

<http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5443036.html>

This was always included on the first day of any patent class in law school.

~~~
pyre
I'm curious what the bias of patents classes in law school are (at least in
your case). Are lawyers really taught that when an engineer brings them an
'invention' to patent they are supposed to try and expand the scope of that
patent to absurd levels just because they think that they can sneak it past
the patent examiners by making the language so obtuse that the simple act of
inhaling and exhaling clocks in at 2,000 pages?

~~~
arethuza
Having been coerced into having work of mine patented I can honestly say that
once the IP "professionals" are finished with your description of your work
you will barely recognize the content - straightforward claims and
descriptions are translated into vague, overly general, statements of the type
that seem to be specifically designed to annoy technical folks.

I found the whole process deeply unpleasant - but as it was mandated by our VC
investors, even though I was CTO, I couldn't say "no".

~~~
CamperBob
Actually, people in your position can, and have, said "no" to demands by
investors to cooperate with patent filings.

It takes a hell of a lot of guts, admittedly, but doing the right thing often
does. The decision has to be made at a pre-investment stage, because you don't
want to be placed in a breach-of-contract position later.

~~~
arethuza
This was a while ago (about 10 years) and I only had a vague idea that patents
were a bad idea from a practical perspective - I was mainly motivated to try
and avoid doing them because it was a huge amount of work, I hate reading
"legalese" and I thought there were better things I could be doing.

So my objections were mainly selfish rather than principled. I like to think
these days I would act on principle...

------
chmike
I'm currently examining the following patent proposing the use of mail quota.
[http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=mFrNAAAAEBAJ&dq=s...](http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=mFrNAAAAEBAJ&dq=spam+mail+quota)
This patent is filed in 2000 and issued 10 years later ! In 2006 it was
apparently extended to international. Does this mean the validity of the
patent is 20 years starting from 2010, or is it from 2000 ? This is weird.
Note that I'm in europe and don't know US patent particularities.

~~~
cpeterso
If email quota is patented, does that mean webmail providers like Gmail and
Hotmail are no allowed to limit my email inbox size? :)

~~~
chmike
The quota is on the ongoing mail, not the storage. Many ISP are using this
method to limit spams or virus propagation from their clients. I think google
does it too.

But this is not original. On the net I found Freedom, initially published 23
nov 1999 which includes outgoing mail quotas
([http://www.homeport.org/~adam/zeroknowledgewhitepapers/arch-...](http://www.homeport.org/~adam/zeroknowledgewhitepapers/arch-
notech.pdf)). For the initial date, check at the bottom.

~~~
chmike
I ment outgoing mail. I can't edit anymore. Sorry.

------
terinjokes
If you scroll to the bottom, it was amended so that claims 1-20 were
cancelled.

There were only 20 claims.

~~~
Yzupnick
True, but it took four years for that to happen.

~~~
uriel
And as somebody else pointed out, they were cancelled due to prior art... in
other patents!

------
brown
I didn't believe this at first. Sadly, it is real:

[http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-
Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sec...](http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-
Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6360693.PN.&OS=PN/6360693&RS=PN/6360693)

~~~
mono
If you're in need of a good startup idea: Claim a patent for crossing fingers
to build a luck generator.

~~~
drndown2007
My son saw this and wants to patent bricks now. I'm so proud :)

------
Vivtek
Yup, an appropriately shaped stick seems to be claimed in claim 1. You might
be able to hit that "adapted to float in water" - does "adapted" require a
process in patentese, or can you simply discover a "pre-adapted" stick, for
example?

Good find. For certain values of "good".

------
pinstriped_dude
Its not just the US. A man in Australia once patented a "circular
transportation facilitation device", yes a wheel!

[http://edition.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/auspac/07/02/austr...](http://edition.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/auspac/07/02/australia.wheel/)

------
yason
We would be better off if we turned the patent office into a mere notary
service where you can just timestamp descriptions of your innovations, and
then go to court yourself fighting for them if you think you have a chance to
win.

~~~
adrianbg
The patent system ensures that your description is defensible so that when the
time comes to defend it you don't suddenly find out you're screwed.

------
EGreg
Thanks, this is another illustration of my point that I often make.
Intellectual monopoly needs to be re-addressed.

------
lotusleaf1987
Everyday it becomes clearer and clearer how completely broken the US patent
system is and how deeply it needs reform.

How much worse is it going to get before it actually gets better?

------
buzzblog
Patent attorney at link below explains why this stick patent is useless in
addition to being silly. He also notes that it is no longer held because the
"inventor" failed failed to pay a fee.

<http://ipwatchdog.com/2010/10/06/animal-toy-patent/id=12711/>

