iMechanica - research patents - Comments

leverage open source for patents

Amit.Ranade — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 22:02:11 -0400

Perhaps leveraging open source to examine patents is a good idea. A wikipedia like site perhaps. This would keep the costs down as well.

Stiffer fees will hurt

ericmock — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 21:51:15 -0400

Stiffer fees (which are already out of reach for most individuals) are not the answer. That will further push the individual (and small company) out of the patent game and make it something solely for large companies. What is needed in the short term is for patents to be more thoroughly reviewed and researched. The scapegoat is always the examiner. However, these people have to review a massive amount of patents that they may really know nothing about. Plus, it's always a game in which inventors make ridiculous claims and then back off.

The real problem is that the burden is on the examiner to show that the invention is not new and not the inventor to prove that it is. Note that all the references cited in this patent were 'cited by examiner'. What really needs to happen is to have an open review process in which the USPTO asks experts in the field and in rival firms to debunk the claims before the patent is awarded. Now, this only happens after the patent is awarded, such that lawyers can pad their pockets. Why not have the arguments in the beginning and keep this stuff out of the courts?

my position on patents

Amit.Ranade — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 21:07:57 -0400

I've seen ideas in two papers in my field patented as well. I was disturbed by this, and frankly I think that government sponsored research performed in universities ought not to be patented. In addition, I think that the patent office does not set the bar high enough. Perhaps a stiffer patent filing fee would help.

(Research) Patents: Not a virtue

David M. Cooper — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 11:39:46 -0400

That may be all well and good for the one who has the means to patent something, but how furious would you be if you had spent a king's ransom on school, learning how to solve this problem, only to find that after all of your hard work, you now have to pay somebody royalties to use what you learned?

I think most patents are

CAEengineer — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 09:41:45 -0400

I think most patents are useless, and laywers might be the ones benefiting from the large amount of useless patents.

If professors apply for patents for their research, will they give credits to their students, colleagues, and sponsers? I hope the answers should be YES.

====================

The classical example of conflict between patents and science!

Mike Ciavarella — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 01:02:15 -0400

I am not sure if you know the story of Einstein at Patent Office

http://imechanica.org/node/3353#comment-7789

Well he was quite amazing this guy even for his boss, but he was very provoquative.

If you think of Einstein of being busy only with relativity, you are wrong, he was a very good Engineer too!

http://sb3.epfl.ch/gm-perso.data/Einstein100.ppt

is a fantastic presentation about Einstein's with original perspectives.

In conclusion, I guess patents follow no different logic as papers, a lot of crap, no good or uniform reviews, and big universities such as MIT who will always have "preferential treatments" for their patents --- finally, in any legal battle, the stronger will win. So patents are good mostly for big multinationals and for something that NEEDS to be protected because it can be easily copied.

Something really extraordinary needs NOT to be patented.

Leonardo da Vinci for example was very secretive about his war machine. He has most of them WRONG, ie. protected by a very small code which is incredible by itself for how he draws very small in those times with no microscopes!

I have seen too much of similar papers in JASA and Sound Vib.

RoozbehSanaei — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 00:27:47 -0400

I have seen too much of these very similar low quality papers in well known journals such as JASA and Sound and Vib. , many of them have nothing to say if reader be a little expert in the field. but i think the reviewers sometimes are not as expert as readers!. this is why i am sure we should think more about our evaluation system.

Re: Ridiculous patents

Biswajit Banerjee — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 23:30:17 -0400

Hi Eric,

I've seen quite a few similar patents in software engineering. I'll try to find some examples when I get the time.

I think that if Apple requires you to obtain a license you have no recourse but to pay or fight it out in court. Once a patent has been issued, whether the method has been used in the past or not cannot be decided without going to court. A way out seems to be to start patenting all your own research too and then have a free for all if you can pay for it:) After all, the right to owning your intellectual property is one of the founding principles of American democracy.

-- Biswajit