The Intellectual Property Law Server

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register.
May 22nd, 2019, 10:28pm

Forums Forums Help Help Search Search Members Members Calendar Calendar Login Login Register Register
   Intellectual Property Forums
  
  
I have an Invention ... Now What?
(Moderators: Forum Admin, JimIvey, JSonnabend)
   Ideas
« Previous topic | Next topic »
Pages: 1 2  Reply Reply Send Topic Send Topic Print Print
   Author  Topic: Ideas  (Read 2771 times)
Short Answer
Guest
Re: Ideas
« Reply #5 on: Nov 27th, 2007, 1:23pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify Remove Remove

If I were to set out to correct alleged inaccuracies, I would write in full sentences.
 
I'll demonstrate.
 
An inventor is not required to hold sufficient skill and knowledge to make the invention claimed in a patent application. The requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112 are directed to the specification of a patent application. They are not directed toward the inventor.
 
Ciao
IP Logged
kylestephen
Newbie
*




   


Posts: 7
Re: Ideas
« Reply #6 on: Nov 27th, 2007, 2:03pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

I do appreciate the comprehensive responses to my initial query, and I understand my lack of specificity (which is purposed for my protection) has resulted in some varying opinions, but I want to clarify that my "invention" in the electronic field, albeit a field in which I am unexperienced,  is the result of a combination product with a new process that is derived by me solely as a result of this unique combination. Does that help at all to redirect your better insight, posters??
IP Logged
kylestephen
Newbie
*




   


Posts: 7
Re: Ideas
« Reply #7 on: Nov 27th, 2007, 2:03pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

*inexperienced
IP Logged
Short Answer
Guest
Re: Ideas
« Reply #8 on: Nov 27th, 2007, 3:30pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify Remove Remove

I'll give an example.
 
I have invented a flashlight that turns on and off when I clap.
 
Clap on ... Clap off ...
 
When I want to find my flashlight in the dark, I clap.  When I want to go to sleep with the flashlight hanging from the top of my tent, I get in my sleeping bag and clap to turn off the flashlight.
 
Is this new?
I don't know.
 
Is this patentable in view of earlier known inventions?
I doubt it. I recall some sort of "clap on" and "clap off" commercials on TV ... but they weren't flashlights.
 
You see, our discussion is leaving out lots of issues regarding whether something is patentable in view of what we call "prior art," which represents the world of technology that existed before our invention.
 
We're just concentrating on the issue of the required amount of technical information that must be presented in a patent application.
 
I am comfortable that I could write a good patent application even though I don't know how to build my "clapper" flashlight. You see, once I turn that idea over to any reasonably skilled electrical engineer, that engineer could bloody well make a "clapper" flashlight. Sound activated switches already exist. Flashlights already exist. It would not be very hard for an electrical engineer to figure out how to make my "clapper" flashlight.
 
So ... if I came up with some drawings that show a flashlight with a little microphone hole, and if I added some drawings of a circuit showing a battery, a light bulb, and a box that we'll call a "controller" that has a little microphone attached to it ... then I could write some stuff about the controller getting a signal from the microphone, applying some sort of threshold test, and responding by activating the light bulb. I could basically make up the whole thing even though I don't know much about sound responsive switches. I could do that because I'm a patent agent. That's what I do. Inventors bring me as much or as little information as they have and I write patent applications.
 
So maybe I could get a patent ... even though I've never made my "clapper" flashlight.
 
Electrical engineers that want to make and sell my "clapper" flashlight could figure out the details later. Each engineer would probably come up with a slightly different version than each other engineer. But, if I did a good job of writing the patent application ... then all of those versions would be protected by my patent.
 
The level of detail required in your patent application will depend on the invention and its relation to the state of the art in its field. If you've got something completely new ... like a time travel machine ... then you've got your work cut out for you. You'd have to teach the whole world how to travel across time. But if you're just adding a flame thrower to a baby carriage ... you wouldn't need much in details. An engineer that knows how to make a flame thrower could attach it to a baby carriage ... he would not need a lot of instructions from you.
 
Where was I? ... I forget. So view this rambling message with my previous messages in mind.
 
People get patents for things they can't build themselves. Your patent application in the field of electronics need not educate every ignoramous (which includes me and assumably you) about electrical engineering. It must provide enough information so that an electrical engineer could make and use your invention.
 
Now that answer wasn't very short.
 
A good patent attorney or patent agent could explain all these concepts in the context of your invention and its field of technology. A private consulation would probably put you in a better position to determine whether you have enough technical information to move forward or whether you need some research and development help before filing a patent application.
 
But I stand by:
People get patents for things they can't build themselves.
 
Ciao
 
 
IP Logged
Short Answer
Guest
Re: Ideas
« Reply #9 on: Nov 27th, 2007, 3:37pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify Remove Remove

Great, now I can't even spell "ignoramus."
Is that irony?
 
Ciao
IP Logged
Pages: 1 2  Reply Reply Send Topic Send Topic Print Print

« Previous topic | Next topic »
Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.3.2!
Forum software copyright 2000-2004 Yet another Bulletin Board