
A few inventors find the contents of their patents declared government secrets - beezle
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-08/congratulations-your-genius-patent-is-now-a-military-secret
======
Animats
There's a significant example of this: Airadar, from 1973.[1] Rufus
Applegarth, an experienced avionics designer, had retired from a major
avionics company (he was one of the founders) and started work on a new
generation of radar units for small planes. He developed a phased-array radar
with electronic scanning and a conformal antenna that fit in the leading edge
of the wing. Existing aircraft radars in those days had a mechanically scanned
dish in the nose of the aircraft, and there was no place to put that on a
single-engine plane. Airadar was way ahead of what the USAF had.

It worked. He put it in a small plane, and Flying magazine reviewed it. Then
he was faced with a patent secrecy order. Airadar wasn't heard from again. It
was decades before electronically scanned radars for light aircraft became
available again.

[1]
[https://books.google.com/books?id=NWzlTqj0gQ4C&pg=PA64](https://books.google.com/books?id=NWzlTqj0gQ4C&pg=PA64)

~~~
secfirstmd
In the case of a government forcing secrecy on your patent, thus blocking you
from public ally commercialising it - is the governemnt then expected to
compensate you in return for your loss?

~~~
URSpider94
RTFA. The answer is generally no. As with most secrecy cases, it's really hard
to prove that the tech has value, since you can't show it to anyone to gauge
their interest.

------
ChuckMcM
When I was researching the Engima machine for my Java Card emulator[1] I came
across the patent issued for the Enigma Rotor system in the US[2]. Filed in
1944 it issued in 1976! Actually October 12th, 1976 which was the same day
that NIST announced DES as the new encryption standard[3].

[1] [http://www.javaworld.com/article/2076726/learn-java/my-
enigm...](http://www.javaworld.com/article/2076726/learn-java/my-enigmatic-
java-ring.html)

[2]
[http://www.google.com/patents/US3984922](http://www.google.com/patents/US3984922)

[3]
[http://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/sp958-lide/250-253.pdf](http://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/sp958-lide/250-253.pdf)

------
Shivetya
so basically a seizure without any compensation required? I do think the
government having issued such an order should be bound in determining an
appropriate amount of money to be issued as compensation, tax free.

ideas are property, they have value, and if a government is going to take your
ideas then they by default admit value so there is a taking.

~~~
mdjeu
I had a similar reaction--the arguments about whether or not the patent have
value seem silly, because if they didn't the government wouldn't issue the
secrecy order to begin with, to say the least of defending the secrecy order.
If they have no value, the secrecy order should be rescinded.

The freedom of speech issue seems to supercede other concerns in my mind, and
I also have problems with the idea of IP in general (and in that respect
disagree with you). However, ignoring all of that, there are other fundamental
flaws with the government's arguments.

------
zekevermillion
Seems like a potential incentive for those with national security-related
inventions to stay away from the USPTO altogether, and rely on trade secrecy
instead.

~~~
trhway
i'd think that it is the other way - in parallel with filing of a patent
application you can just publish it on the Internet thus making any
application of secrecy to it pointless (until of course publishing of such
info is in violation of some already existing law in the first place).

"national security-related inventions" \- it is a pretty vague notion. Anybody
who saw real "national interest" Green Card applications can attest to it :)
All China driving Priuses or Teslas would make China much more [energy]
independent and this definitely would be related to US national security. Does
it mean that such patents and technology should be made controlled or even
secret?

~~~
Normal_gaussian
publishing it on the internet prevents protection for you to make money off
it.

Charitable yes, but not exactly in their interests.

~~~
spbaar
Aren't patent applications public?

~~~
zekevermillion
Not for 18 months, but the applicant can request earlier release.

35 U.S.C. 122 Confidential status of applications; publication of patent
applications. ____*

(b) PUBLICATION.— (1) IN GENERAL.— (A) Subject to paragraph (2), each
application for a patent shall be published, in accordance with procedures
determined by the Director, promptly after the expiration of a period of 18
months from the earliest filing date for which a benefit is sought under this
title. At the request of the applicant, an application may be published
earlier than the end of such 18-month period. ... (2) EXCEPTIONS.— (A) An
application shall not be published if that application is— ... (ii) subject to
a secrecy order under section 181 ;

------
x1798DE
I don't totally understand how this is not a violation of one's free speech if
ideas are being banned. I can see where they get the power to prevent the
patent from issuing, but what part of the constitution allows you to ban a
private citizen from speaking about their ideas?

~~~
URSpider94
The part about "yelling fire in a crowded theatre." There are tons of
restrictions on free speech, the government must prove a compelling interest.

~~~
dalke
There are restrictions on "time, manner, and place".

You can't use a bullhorn to make political speeches on a suburban street
corner at 3am. You can't stand up in the middle of a concert to give a
discourse on Hegelian philosophy. You can't use graffiti to express your
dislike of the EMU.

And the "[falsely] yelling fire in a crowded theatre" was used in the decision
of Schenck v. United States in 1919 to say that opposition to the draft during
World War I was not covered under free speech. It was then used as cover to
punish anti-government speech, and was overturned in Brandenburg v. Ohio in
1969. Quoting
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio)
:

> Finally, Douglas dealt with the classic example of a man "falsely shouting
> fire in a theater and causing a panic". In order to explain why someone
> could be legitimately prosecuted for this, Douglas called it an example in
> which "speech is brigaded with action". In the view of Douglas and Black,
> this was probably the only sort of case in which a person could be
> prosecuted for speech.

------
deftnerd
If someone invents something that gets classified as secret and then a decade
later another inventor invents the same thing, but by then the government
doesn't feel the need to classify it anymore, would the original inventor have
any recourse?

How does patent infringement claims work in a world with secret patents?

------
crypto5
reminds me this good movie:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travelling_Salesman_(2012_film...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travelling_Salesman_\(2012_film\))

Guys found proof for P = NP, and government declared it as national asset and
government secret.

~~~
Houshalter
If I remember correctly, the government was just offering to pay them for the
algorithm. They didn't declare it a secret and force them to sell it. That is
why the whole movie was them just debating what they should do with it.

~~~
crypto5
They declared. Government agent started explicitly threatening them with
multiple felonies for proof disclosure and threatening 4th guy's family if he
will not sign papers.

------
joesmo
How about not allowing fantasy ideas that have no basis in reality to be
patented? That will solve a whole lot of problems, the least of which is this.

------
pmx
“Nobody has invented warp drive or time travel. They’re fairly mundane
inventions that may have some relevance to the military,”

None of the ones they have released from secrecy. Anything as incredible as
those examples is more likely to stay secret.

------
faebi
If a patent is secret, shouldn't it then be possible to get the patent in
another country? I mean how should others know something is secret? Or am I
missing something?

~~~
dogma1138
I think the espionage act might have something to say about it.

~~~
Finnucane
More likely, depending on the nature of the patent, export controls, which are
specifically covered by the Invention Secrecy Act.

------
x3n0ph3n3
That's what you get for giving away your secrets to the government for their
"protection." He should have just made the product and sold it.

