
Will 2014 bring the death of the patent troll? - perfectcents
http://projects.aljazeera.com/2013/patent-story/
======
throwawaykf03
Hah, M-CAM. Anytime an article quotes these guys, I know it's going to have
some low quality reporting about patents. (And, yes, this includes the "When
Patents Attack" episode [1] on "This American Life", where the very same M-CAM
dude claimed there was a "patent on toast".)

I looked through every patent on online backups that M-CAM said "covered the
exact same thing" in that episode [1], and found each one to claim something
entirely different. Whatever their method of analysis is, it was completely
useless then.

I also looked through the first few of the "just 70" out of the 5160 matches
M-CAM found in this article, and found nothing really similar to Bobo's patent
(or indeed, each other). Sure, there may be some really damaging prior art out
there. I just highly doubt M-CAM found it.

But don't take my word for it, others have called these out as well [2, 3].

That said, if Huster can show that she indeed was an inventor, this patent is
trivially invalid because she is not named on it. This is the same thing that
killed the IV patent in "When Patents Attack Part 2" [4].

1\. [http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-
archives/episode/441/t...](http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-
archives/episode/441/transcript) 2\. [http://gametimeip.com/2012/04/13/q-why-
was-mdb-capital-right...](http://gametimeip.com/2012/04/13/q-why-was-mdb-
capital-right-and-m-cam-so-very-very-wrong-on-aol-patent-value/) 3\.
[http://www.iam-
magazine.com/blog/Detail.aspx?g=c5c2c5b5-ecf9...](http://www.iam-
magazine.com/blog/Detail.aspx?g=c5c2c5b5-ecf9-4b7a-b019-6e72ab6170e5) 4\.
[http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-
archives/episode/496/t...](http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-
archives/episode/496/transcript)

~~~
qohen
_where the very same M-CAM dude claimed there was a "patent on toast"._

This comes pretty close no? "Bread refreshing method" (US 6080436 A).

[http://www.google.com/patents/US6080436](http://www.google.com/patents/US6080436)

 _Abstract

A method of refreshening a bread product by heating the bread product to a
temperature between 2500 are maintained at this temperature range for a period
of 3 to 90 seconds._

~~~
throwawaykf03
No, because as the claims state, the bread is heated at a temperature between
2500 F. and 4500 F. Toasters generally operate at much, much lower
temperatures -- around 300 F. In case this seems like a minor distinction,
consider that toasting bread at 2500 - 4500 F does not give you toast :-)

 _" A toaster works by applying radiant heat directly to a bread slice. When
the bread's surface temperature reaches about 310 degrees Farenheit, a
chemical change known as the Maillard reaction begins. Sugars and starches
start to caramelize - turn brown - and to take on intense flavors.

"That's toast.

"With more heating, the sugars and underlying grain fibers start turning into
carbon.

"That's burnt toast."_

\- Quote from a Consumer Reports test on toasters, June 1990 (found at
[http://www.toaster.org/works.html](http://www.toaster.org/works.html))

I'm not sure what this patent gives you -- heck, maybe it does refresh stale
bread -- but it certainly won't give you toast.

------
moocowduckquack
In deference to Betteridge, I'd say no.

------
RexRollman
No, I don't think so. Like copyright, there is too much money invested in the
patent system to allow for any real, meaningful change.

------
josh_fyi
Wishful thinking. But we can wish, can't we?

