|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 23 2013 @ 09:54 AM EDT |
With regard to your first point: A) That's not true. You could still invent,
for example, a trap that did not lure the mouse, but instead, hunted the mouse
and trapped him where he was found. That wouldn't be covered by my patent. B)
No, it is possible to get a patent on something but be blocked from making it by
an earlier patent. In that case, you can either wait for the earlier patent to
expire or you can license or cross license with the earlier patent owner.
I understand that you think this is not fair or unreasonable, but I disagree.
If I discover the ground breaking concept and disclose it to the world and put
it to use, when the world wants to stand on the shoulders of giants why
shouldn't I be able to lease them the space?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 23 2013 @ 09:58 AM EDT |
I'm not sure what your point is. Are you complaining that the system is not
perfect and that art can be overlooked? Are you complaining that an examiner
and a court can view the significance of an earlier patent differently? Are you
alleging fraud?
Are you looking for an explanation, such as, Apple is big and it is possible
that inventor A/attorney A might not be aware of what inventor B/attorney B were
doing?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
