Are we all infringing this patent?

[Involute CurveParticipant @involutecurve]

I occasionaly do some product design for a well established injection moulding company, its mainly consumer products but sometimes automotive items, often these are injection moulded in plastics, and or wax for casting, I also do some injection mould tool design, the Software (they own the seat) I use does the cad side, Core Cavity separation, split line recognition, draft analysis, has a library of die sets ejection pins, guide bushed etc etc etc, it also does the cam side, I think its recognised as the industry standard in this field, its a British software company, I think the first version I used was back in 2001 I know it existed before this.

Patents often get granted, even though there is obvious prior art in existence, it depends a lot on the country, and also the patent examiner, keep in mind patent lawyers have to make a living……usually from idiots with an idea for a fifth leg on a horse.

[John Stevenson 1Participant @johnstevenson1]

Everyone is missing the point.

It's a US patent that unless a UK equivalent could [ and it can't ] be obtained then it can only be enforced in the US.

Move on, nothing to see here.

[Ady1Participant @ady1]

The USA patents a lot of stupid stuff, it helps to restrict overseas companies from getting into their marketplace

1-click payment was one of the dumbest in history, the biggest problem IMO is the lawyers trying to create a market for fees where common sense would say there was no case to answer

Golly Gawsh a one click payment system. wowee

[Ady1Participant @ady1]

The US system is on a slippery slope

It lets large companies patent all sorts of silly and blatantly obvious ideas and gives legal force to those who want to limit their competitors' use of really obvious ideas.

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Two small points of interest:

1. This additional patent
2. The fact that both have been assigned to Wells Fargo Bank

… Make of that what you will.

MichaelG.

[jann westParticipant @jannwest71382]

We are all infringing this one for a circular transport facilitation device …

http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~gfx/courses/2002/BigData/papers/Misc/Wheel%20Patent.pdf

[Steve WithnellParticipant @stevewithnell34426]

Once upon a time I was a governor at the local High School – around the time teachers where getting laptops issued as part of their 'toolkit'. I was appalled to discover, that the passing of student attendance details (ie taking the register in a morning) by Wi-Fi was protected by patent. When the patent was challenged in court, a government minister supported the grant of the patent. Either you bought the company's software for 'taking the register' OR you paid them a licence fee (£100's) for using your own.

I thought that a disgrace.

Steve

[John FieldingParticipant @johnfielding34086]

As I understand patent law, it is to protect an original person or entity from having their idea from being used by a third party for "Commercial Gain". That being another entity/company using the idea to make money.

As someone pointed out a US Patent is only enforceable in the USA, if a "World-Wide Patent" were taken out then it doesn't necessarily give 100% protection as some countries do not recognise this type of patent. It is also very expensive to get a WWP and can take tens of years to implement. IIRC a patent is only valid for a limited time, 7-years springs to mind from memory. So all one needs to do is to wait until the patent expires and then it is free for all to use. As a private individual there is nothing stopping you making such an item for your own use or interest as long as you don't sell it to a third party. Since you have not made any "commercial gain" from the idea you are exempt.

The only people who really make money out of patents generally are the legal fraternity, seldom does an inventor or patentee make a much money unless they can sell the rights to someone else!

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Posted by Steve Withnell on 24/04/2016 13:26:20:

Once upon a time I was a governor at the local High School – < etc. >

.

Interesting, Steve … was it the Bromcom system ?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bromcom

MichaelG.

[John HaineParticipant @johnhaine32865]

Worth noting that this US patent had corresponding filings in Germany and UK at least, though not clear if they were granted.

All very well going on about how many stupid things are patented, field day for lawyers etc, but wait until you get a smart idea and develop a killer gadget after years of work and face the prospect of someone copying it to reap the profit of your sweat and tears – then you may see the point of patents. Yes, there's a lot of very broad patenting going on and yes, some big companies with huge legal teams misuse the system, but this one doesn't strike me as a product of that mindset. As someone said above, they have used this firm's services, it just sounds like they are trying to protect their own intellectual property they probably invested a packet in developing from cheap copying, and more power to their elbow too.

[MuzzerParticipant @muzzer]

Posted by John Fielding on 24/04/2016 13:49:54:

…if a "World-Wide Patent" were taken out then it doesn't necessarily give 100% protection as some countries do not recognise this type of patent. It is also very expensive to get a WWP and can take tens of years to implement.

Not aware of such a patent. If you want to have patent coverage in every country, you have to apply for and receive a patent in each one (true, you can get European patent coverage but that's an exception). That would cost stupid money and would never pay back. You have to think carefully about which markets to get patent coverage in. And some patents aren't really worth having as they don't offer a great deal of protection!Sometimes it makes sense to publish simply so that none else can patent it and restrict your business.

Of course, you are also legally obliged to get regulatory approvals in each market you wish to sell into before you even make a sale, so you need to keep an eye on overall costs….

I know of companies that have spent hundreds of thousands of pounds getting patent coverage in all sorts of countries that will never pay back. Sometimes there are other motives (investors like to see them, vanity, naivety etc) but it can be a massive slice of profits that could be better invested in R&D etc. When I worked at Motorola, anyone who managed to lodge a patent application got a cash payment ($1000?) and another if it became a full patent. Needless to say there were some individuals who ended up with literally dozens of patents, none of which had any commercial value and would never make a penny for the company. Mind you, this shouldn't have been a surprise, as it was a company run by thrusting idiots, which is possibly why it has pretty much ceased to exist…

Merry

[Russell EberhardtParticipant @russelleberhardt48058]

Posted by Muzzer on 24/04/2016 14:24:10:When I worked at Motorola, anyone who managed to lodge a patent application got a cash payment ($1000?) and another if it became a full patent.

When I worked at Philips Research Labs I received 50p for each patent I came up with, and then only after it became approved! The idea of these big companies is to build up a thick portfolio of patents so that they can negotiate on a "Let me use yours and I'll let you use mine" basis. The thicker the stack of papers in the negotiation the better.

Russell.

[JAParticipant @ja]

The company I worked for in my later days of employment encouraged us to make patent applications. It was worthwhile. An application was worth £50 and a successful granting £500 (the actual figures changed from time to time). Mind you if there was more than one person named in the application the money was shared. If the patent did bring money into the company or saved money the applicant then received a small percentage of that money.

Most patents are rubbish, some are worthwhile and the idea/process can be licensed to others and bring in money, and a few are the crown jewels that hind and make life difficult for competitors. The classic example of the latter was Bolton and Watt's steam engine patent that delayed the development of the steam engine.

The company wanted us to take out patents to improve its image, showing that its engineers were innovative. This was about 20 years ago and one of the leading firms at producing patents was Kodak, there you had to have patents in your name to be promoted – they completely missed the digital camera revolution.

JA

[AjohnwParticipant @ajohnw51620]

I don't think there is any such thing as a world wide patent. Not when I had some granted anyway. Patents are simply taken out country by country but it may be possible to take on out covering the EU now.

Usually particular market areas are targeted so for most things the USA is a must. I aught to remember which ones mine were taken out in but afraid other than the UK and USA that was about it but there were several others. The USA was worst for throwing back irrelevant prior art. My impression was that this was far more likely if the patent might prove to be of some use. Then the arguments start. That was fun as I had to talk technically via a patent lawyer. Good at his job in his 30's and was sure he would retire at 50 with a lot of money. His ambition.

These days lots are taken out to hinder. The reason is simple especially in manufacture. Some one wants to start making something and does and then finds that they may be infringing a patent and the holder takes legal action and the usual result is that they can't make anything at all until it's sorted out. Often this goes on for a long long time. I've been in the position of not being able to buy components because the supplier was in dispute with another manufacturer over patents. It's a fact that the supplier wasn't infringing the patents but I couldn't use it just in case the claims were correct. This went on for so long that the supplier withdrew the part as far as higher volume customers were concerned.

John

–

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Posted by JA on 24/04/2016 17:55:42:

Kodak … – they completely missed the digital camera revolution.

JA

.

Not entirely true, JA

They made some very important sensors !!

**LINK**

MichaelG.

[Cornish JackParticipant @cornishjack]

Interesting quote from last night's bed-time reading …

"The latest suggestion of a possible aplication, however, is a device which will scan a drawing photo-electrically, translate its lines into the movements of cutting tools, and eject the finished part. I cannot see this being applied to the home workshop of the model engineer, but who knows whether it will not ultimately become an established feature of industrial production."

Source … The Model Engineer July 3rd 1941 – "Smoke Rings" by-line Percival Marshall!!

rgds

Bill

[AjohnwParticipant @ajohnw51620]

I think it was more of a problem that Kodak couldn't keep up with the likes of Sony and if my info is correct Canon managed to develop cheaper low noise cmos sensors all on their own. That took them from being a relatively small slr player into being a very major dslr player.

I do wonder if they really did produce the sensor all on their own as by a fluke I do know what company they went to for the micro controllers that they fitted into their cameras so wonder if the same company did them really.

John

–

Edited By Ajohnw on 24/04/2016 19:54:55

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

John,

Kodak >> TrueSense >> OnSemi

It's on the internet, but you don't trust my links

… so I will leave you to find it for yourself

MichaleG.

[egaParticipant @ega]

The answer to the OP's question so far as England and Wales is concerned is almost certainly to be found in s 60 of the Patents Act 1977 which is readily available on line. Acts done privately *and* not for commercial purposes are not infringements of patent.

I am no expert but I do know that IP law is a can of worms.

Edited By ega on 25/04/2016 16:41:18

[Author]

Posts