Intellectual Property Forums (http://www.intelproplaw.com/Forum/Forum.cgi)

(Message started by: Bugsy on Nov 1st, 2005, 10:49pm)

Title: re-invention
Post by Bugsy on Nov 1st, 2005, 10:49pm
Hi Guys,

I have posted a couple times with no responces and thats ok. Now i have done more reseach i have this questiion for you professionals. By the way love this site and wish there was more.

Question: In my field there are many players, designers, programers, engineers. The market in this segment is booming. I have found a small niche in this fast paced sector. What my invention is based on is using many current avaliable parts using my process to create a very sellable consumer based product. basically i have re-invented the wheel using new advancments in tech.

I dont believe its obvious or it would be on the shelves, i know its not because i have been in this industry 25 years and have spent the last year looking for it. I believe its currently not produced because like the oil industry they dont like batterys to run cars nor would certain people in my sector like my idea as it will kill current products being sold. Now i have not invented a new glorious fuel but i have created a wanted or should i say usefull product that many would like to use.

It could be said by the guys on the other side of the fence, hey if we just changed this and this it could be used in this large market. its that simple. can i protect my process and method?

brad, bugsy is my nick


Title: Re: re-invention
Post by JimIvey on Nov 2nd, 2005, 9:31am
Yes, assuming you're correct that your idea is not obvious and useful (novelty is implicit in non-obviousness).  That's all that's required.

Incidentally, method and process are synonymous in patents -- an exception to my addage that there are no synonyms in patents.

You should be aware that lack of your invention in the marketplace doesn't mean that it's not described in some publication somewhere.  There is always risk of prior art, but you seem comfortable with your current level of risk.

Sorry about the lack of response before.  I'm not sure why that happened.  There is a hint of oil company conspiracy theory in your post and, while perhaps true (no opinion on that here), I don't know what to do with that in terms of patent law.  In addition, I've seen (in other forums) countless claims of a new perpetual motion machine that, when coupled with a generator, will produce unlimited free energy.  After a few of those, one tends to get a bit jaded.

Regards.

Title: Re: re-invention
Post by bugsy on Nov 2nd, 2005, 3:30pm
Thank you very much for your reply,

My invention or should i say re-invention has nothing to do with the oil business. So i can sleep i guess... haha

My re-invention is a better recipe i guess you could say on a current product.

Quote: "Yes, assuming you're correct that your idea is not obvious and useful"

what do you mean by "and useful" i would hope my product woudl be usefull to someone or who would buy it?

Brad

Title: Re: re-invention
Post by JimIvey on Nov 2nd, 2005, 8:47pm

on 11/02/05 at 15:30:12, bugsy wrote:
what do you mean by "and useful" i would hope my product woudl be usefull to someone or who would buy it?

Utility is one of the three main requirements for a patent.  But just about everything is useful.  It's easier to study the few exceptions that to study the various things considered useful.

Things lacking utility include laws of nature, natural phenomena, mathematical algorithms, and things contrary to public policy.  An example of the last one might be a method for committing murder and avoiding detection.  

You have a recipe for making something -- I think it's a fairly safe wager that you won't have utility problems.

Regards.

Title: Re: re-invention
Post by Isaac Clark on Nov 2nd, 2005, 10:05pm
I think bugsy was confused by a typo that made it appear that you meant the invention should preferrably be not useful.  

Title: Re: re-invention
Post by JimIvey on Nov 2nd, 2005, 10:24pm
Ah, yes.  ... (i) not obvious and (ii) useful, rather than not (i) obvious and (ii) useful.

Sorry.

Title: Re: re-invention
Post by Bugsy on Nov 3rd, 2005, 11:13am
Great guys,

i really appreciate this as i have never hada patent nor invented anything. Its just that i see these all day long and though why is nobody paying attention to what to me seems very obvious product. So i have done some research over the past year to find out i guess its only very obvious to me and that it would be very helpful and useful to others. if this flys i will post all the story here.

thank you again.



Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.3.2!
Forum software copyright 2000-2004 Yet another Bulletin Board