Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[HippoButt]

Hello all,

I'm VERY new to how patents work (started looking at laws and things yesterday).  I have developed a device (for my own personal use) that seems to be covered by this patent. http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2006/0199682.html  My device is an actual implementation of a disc locator, not just the idea, which is all that this patent seems to be.  I'm wondering what steps I would have to take to bring my device to market.  I assume that I would have to get some sort of license from the patent holder.  Is that correct?  Any help anyone can give on the matter would be greatly appreciated. 

Thanks!

[bleedingpen]

That is in fact a patent application that went abandoned.  You don't need to license from the owner of that patent for that particular patent application. 

That does not mean that you are free to bring the product to market, only that you don't have to worry about infringing that particular application since it never issued. 

[MLM]

One thing that you need to keep in mind is that the only things a patent protects are those embodiments or implementations that are specifically described in the claims, which are the numbered paragraphs near the end of the patent. Just because something is described in words or shown in a drawing of a patent does not mean that everything there is actually patented. Many patents only protect very specific implementations of an invention, often because other aspects of it were not novel at the time the invention was conceived.

Another thing to check when you are seaching for patents is to see if the patent is an issued patent (a patent application is not a patent but may become one someday so those are important too) and that the patent is still in force (i.e., it has not expired). You can find this information at http://www.uspto.gov. However, if you are serious about bringing your invention to market, it is worth consulting a professional who can help you determine if your invention might infringe someone's patent, because it can be difficult to figure this out on your own.

[bleedingpen]

One thing that you need to keep in mind is that the only things a patent protects are those embodiments or implementations that are specifically described in the claims

I know what you are getting at, but this isn't correct. 

[HippoButt]

Thanks to everyone for the speedy replies.  I really appreciate it.  You guys were a great help.

[bleedingpen]

One thing that you need to keep in mind is that the only things a patent protects are those embodiments or implementations that are specifically described in the claims

I know what you are getting at, but this isn't correct. 

Right, that only applies to means-plus-function type claims.  Non-MPF claims encompass anything that the claim describes.  Jim Ivey recently discussed this using an example of covering circuits made with transistors, when the patent was written during the vacuum tube era of electronics.

What is specifically described in the specification is what matters for MPF claims (most of the time).

[MYK]

What is specifically described in the specification is what matters for MPF claims (most of the time).

Argh.  This is what I get for posting while drunk.

[bleedingpen]

What is specifically described in the specification is what matters for MPF claims (most of the time).

Argh.  This is what I get for posting while drunk.

You would have to be a real loser to post on an IP message board while drunk.  Kindof like a patent attorney.  Oh wait  that's all of us!

[jingjing]

"In reviewing the hundreds of pleadings this case has generated, the Court is reminded of the story of the bride Scheherezade and the sultan Schahriar. It was said that Schahriar, a powerful sultan, developed a bitterness and distrust of women when he discovered his first wife was unfaithful to him. Though Schahriar vowed never to marry again, circumstances forced him to wed Scheherezade, a girl who  [**59] he had known since childhood. Schahriar decided that because he was forced to marry Scheherezade, he would murder her after their wedding night. In an effort to forestall her death, however, Scheherezade regaled Schahriar with a long series of fascinating stories for one thousand and one nights. Just as the bride was able to ensure her life would continue by generating story after story, this case has taken on a life of its own, sustained by the never ending possibility that there must be just one more issue or  [*898]  claim that needs rehashing. With this last opinion, it is the Court's prayer that we may now all rest in peace."

Insituform Techs., Inc. v. Cat C