Slashdot Mirror
Patent Granted on Sideways Swinging
Matt Van Gundy writes "In another brilliant move by the well loved U.S. Patent and Trademark Office a patent (6,368,227) has been granted to a Mr. Steven Olson for inventing the method of swinging sideways on a swing. The patent even lays claim to "inducing a component of forward and back motion into the swinging motion, resulting in a swinging path that is generally shaped as an oval." I claim prior art, but perhaps I am one of the few fortunate ones who enjoyed this method of swinging long before its 'invention' by Mr. Steven Olson. " My favorite line from the patent : "The user may even choose to produce a Tarzan-type yell while swinging in the manner described, which more
accurately replicates swinging on vines in a dense jungle forest. Actual jungle forestry is not required."
Tarzan yell ??
... there is no way i'm falling for this
c'mon
This is the funniest thing I've seen in a long time. If the patent office doesn't get egg on its face over this one... oh by the way, first post (I think)
I'll have to try that position some time. I've been swinging for a while now and never come across a partner who.. oh wait ;-)
Antiquis temporibus, nati tibi similes in rupibus ventosissimis exponebantur ad necem.
I challenge you all to find a more stupid method to patent.. And try :-)
Normal people worry me!
You fuckers can't simply accept that someone else has ideas that are new and unique, can you? Everything is obvious and easy to see once you hear it.
Don't go saying that there's prior art or that it's such an obvious invention. Where is your prior art? Can you prove that the idea is obvious?
I didn't think so. This patent stands.
OMG i can't believe this ...
... yet it is ... strange how life surpasses fiction time and time again.
this is WAY too ridiculous to be true
excerpt from page:
Inventors: Olson; Steven (337 Otis Ave., St. Paul, MN 55104)
Appl. No.: 715198
Filed: November 17, 2000
CLAIM
I claim:
1. A method of swinging on a swing, the method comprising the steps of:
a) suspending a seat for supporting a user between only two chains that are hung from a tree branch;
b) positioning a user on the seat so that the user is facing a direction perpendicular to the tree branch;
c) having the user pull alternately on one chain to induce movement of the user and the swing toward one side, and then on the other chain to induce movement of the user and the swing toward the other side; and
d) repeating step c) to create side-to-side swinging motion, relative to the user, that is parallel to the tree branch.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the method is practiced independently by the user to create the side-to-side motion from an initial dead stop.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the method further comprises the step of:
e) inducing a component of forward and back motion into the swinging motion, resulting in a swinging path that is generally shaped as an oval.
4. The method of claim 3, wherein the magnitude of the component of forward and back motion is less than the component of side-to-side motion.
good thing my childhood tire swing was suspended by rope since his method only patents suspension by chains...
hey maybe i could go patent the rope/tire method and become a millionaire!
A sideways swinger's bar with a cowboy neal theme. Think of it. "Patent Pending Swinging Action" Hep Cats and Swingers Welcome Here. We'll make a mint!
Find out about my new childrens book: SS Death Camp Criminal Batallion Go To Monte Carlo For The Massacre
This only applies to two chains hung from a tree branch (specified in the Claims section). The background section describes "other substantially horizontal support" but it's not in the Claims section. Legalistic? Yes. But someone has to think of the children ...
I did that when I before, and so did my sister!
It's my invention! Mine, MINE, MINE!
So I will swing sideways when I want to and I won't license it from you, sue me!
This should have been listed as a "funny" article. There's no way this is for real. Anyone remember a while back when someone patented the rights to the ";-)" and people were in an uproar until they realized that you could liscence them for free. I'm sure the same thing will happen here. Probably just someone out to prove that the patent office is either overworked or very negligent.
All a coder really wants, are fast cars, fast women and fast algorithms.
They are hilarious ... i have been LMAO for 10 mins ...
...
this guy is a genious
link : loong link
i would've done this for free ... omg ... this is soooo funny ...
:)
i wonder if i could get away with applaying for a patent on leaning back on a chair like the simpsons B Franklin episode, but without the supports
We need less hatin' and more appreciatin'. Ya'll stand around sayin "Man, I coulda done that." Well so what? You didn't patent it, now did you? And now someone else did and ya'll just jealous.
Na'am sayin?
i think he described the motion of bodies suspended this way (and various others) but it was sooo long ago i studied this i can't really reacall ...
...
google here i come
This is absolutely the best thing that could happen - getting more and more ridiculous patents approved. This will prove to people once and for all the USPTO is obviously approving these things in their sleep. Pretty soon the books will be bulging with absurd patents, and someone will call for a review of ALL the patents issued, and whether or not they actually were deserved and worthy of continued enforcement. A buddy of mine that used to work for a very large electronics manufacturer actually submitted a patent for a picture-window Ant Farm as a joke, and was almost awarded it!
-- You are in a maze of little, twisty passages, all different... --
the future of humanity hinges on this being a delightfully entertaining method of pointing out the inadequacies of our nation's patent system. oh please oh please let it just be social commentary in patent form....
So does this mean the Patent Office now implicitly agrees that they think patents are silly, too?
(BTW, does anybody else see the potential here for using this as a general call for taxpayer revolt? How much did we pay for this? Do our congresspeople approve on wasting such funds? Do they want re-elected?)
There is no need to use a SlashDot sig for SEO...
... that just cracks me up...
You complete idiot. Every one of us did this on the swings when there was no-one there to swing us. You clearly are the stupid one, for not ever leaving your room to go to the swings...
You mean I can't charge people to watch me swing sideways anymore without worrying about an lawsuit?
Just when I thought I hit it big...
If you're religishitty, KILL YOURSELF!
If the patent office doesn't have the resources to properly investigate the patent, it should deny it.
If a single company submits too many patents, they should be denied.
Why is the default to allow a patent if it can't be proven not to be original, useful and non-obvious?
Licenses are available from the inventor upon request. ,-}
Huh? I need a license to swing ? I'd better jump off right now then
$ strings FTP.EXE | grep Copyright
@(#) Copyright (c) 1983 The Regents of the University of California.
Now where am I supposed to send in the royalty for trying out this technique? And what are the rates, please?
Don't Panic
This is by the same federal government, (though, to be fair, by a different agency), that issued student visas to the 9-11 hijackers 6 months after the fact.
I'm not a lawyer, but is there anyone out there who is? Wouldn't this sort of gross incompetence bring into question other patents issued, at least by this obviously negligent examiner?
And at least the "Tarzan" yell part gives off the strong suggestion that this was submitted as a goof.
The intellectual property laws in this country have become nonsensical and counter-productive in their execution and enforcement.
Embarassing.
Funny though.
evanchik.net
OOOH, I can patent lethal injection, then refuse to license it out, stopping capitol punishment. hrm. can I patent war?
closed minded is as closed minded does
For those of you blowing milk out of your nose while you laugh at this article, I just want to inform you that I own the patent on that method. Thank you.
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
One question I do have is that would the supporting structure being a steel frame make it a completely different device to one that used a tree as a supporting structure? If that was the case then wouldn't it set a precedent for taking existing patents, changing something small and insignificant, and then applying for a fresh patent as a new device?
That can't be right. Everyone would end up doing it and the whole patent system would collapse. Oh...
"Licenses are available from the inventor upon request. "
... but it DOES NOT actually say so.
... after all he does hold the patent to it
Which might mean that he will give them out for free
What if he decides to charge elementary schools with swings for using his invention ? and makes the districts pay
:)
Did they want to issue this turkey on April 1 but somehow not get it out til April 9 because of slow bureaucratic wheels? Let's hope.
Seriously, we do. I'm moving to Canada... anyone want to house me for a bit? I'll fix your computer.
"Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
Patently Stupid!
--
"we live in a post-ideological world..." - Billy Bragg.
Why are you beating up on the guy who submitted this patent is clearly 'taking the mick' out of the US patent office, and maybe he has a good point - the way to make them see the error of their ways might be to submit ever more obvious and ludicrous patent applications (disguised as very serious proposals) until they realise that we're making fun on them.
There's no better way of making an organsation change then making it realise that it's an object of ridicule.
I have just patented a way to drink beverages out of an aluminum can. I place a tab at the top with a slightly scored circle around it. When the person raises the tab the sealed can is opened at the top. The person is then able to drink from the can at their own leisure.
Send $50,000,000 paypal to me and I won't have all you fools charged the billions I am owed.
"Well kids, you tried your best, and you failed. The lesson is, never try." -Homer Simpson
sarcasm Pronunciation Key (särkzm) n.
1. A cutting, often ironic remark intended to wound.
2. A form of wit that is marked by the use of sarcastic language and is intended to make its victim the butt of contempt or ridicule.
3. The use of sarcasm. See Synonyms at wit1.
Isn't it about time that patent office employees were required to have at least graduated kindergarten?
An IQ over 10 might be nice too.
Tonight I'm going to patent a spitball:
1) Hock
2) Ptuie
3) Tarzan-like yell
That is, until I get through figuring out how to apply the patent on my home-made swing in the back, which i've used for front, back and side-swinging for ages.
Good enough for the USPTO?
The Wknd Sessions - Malaysian and South East Asia independent music
Can somebody put up a mirror? Or would that violate some kind of IP laws? You never know these days.
The USPTO has become such an outrage that it needs to become in issue in this year's elections. That can only happen if media attention can be drawn to absurd patents, and this is just the kind of thing to do it. Everyone can understand how preposterous this is; and then, if we're lucky, the TV news will get someone like Bruce Perens or ESR as a talking head for background, and that person can go on to say, "You know the patent office does this all the time, let me give you some more examples, and let me explain the damage that it does to our economy." It's our best chance.
If we're unlucky, they'll put on an M$ spokesmen, who will use the TV sound bite to blast the GPL as an evil, anti-capitalist plot.
Always keep a sapphire in your mind
Does this mean i can get arrested for swinging on the swing sideways without a lisence?
"Imagine me naked, now imagine me quickly turning a sharp corner." -Cyko
This message was brought to you by the death of 30 brain cells.
Maybe the agent posseses a sense of humor and an apreciation for irony that has slowly twisted his mind over the years. It started simply. A inane little patent. Won't hurt anything. But it was darned funny. And nobody caught it. So he upped the stakes with another gem. Unnoticed. And another. And another. The beancounter souless zombies that are his coworkers oblivious to the parade of delicious irony under their noses, presented by inane claims, burried in a sea of paperwork. Taunting him. Daring him. Just a little more. They'll appreciate his humor. If he just found one obvious enough.
Maybe our mastermind is actually an activist. Working from the inside. Sabotaging the system. Poisoning the dignity of the entire USPTO system with more and more outlandish patent grants. Daring the public to see the USPTO for the foolishness that it really is. They'll apreciate how foolish it all is. If he just made it obvious enough.
Or maybe there is no mastermind. We are simply witnessing the byproduct of a reality distortion only known to exist within the proximity of US Governmental beurocracy and Steve Jobs.
So many posibilities. And we've only just began to scratch the surface...
What's the suggestion we always hear when we are lacking any form of "power" for some task? Distribute it! So I am suggesting that we replace the USPTO with Patent@Home, where all patent applications will be randomly distributed between the participants to be approved or rejected. It might seem that giving the decision to 14 year old kids with no kind of training on the subject is a bad idea... but then, look at the parent.
sic transit gloria mundi
Hey, maybe if I describe it properly and clearly list out all the steps involved, I may get a patent for the way I pick my nose!
This is not my sig.
Right that does it, ive tried to be polite, but im sorry, your country's patent system is f*cked up. Go patent sticking it up your ass, or someone else will...
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
So when my start-up software company is taken to court by Megacorp Inc. for infringement of some silly software patent, can I produce this as evidence that the patent system is broke?
Folks, this is mostly an amusement patent. The inventor was a seven year old, and of course he's not the first to invent it. But his dad's a patent lawyer and wrote it up for him on a lark.
Like the laser cat-exerciser patent, nothing will ever come of this. It's just there to be silly. Nobody will ever be sued for infringement. Can't there be a sense of humour in this?
Has it been over a year since you last donated to the Electronic Frontier Foundation
I might just have to infringe on this guys patent now that I know it exists.. I'm upset that he doesn't credit Isaac Newton for our basic laws of physics, without which, his invention would be impossible.
This is a pretty good example of whats wrong with patents..
that is actually a good idea, i think. a 'frivolous' patent like that would truly point out the problems with the current patent system, most of which just involved under-educated and probably underpaid workers. a very solvable problem i think. and if you are against capital punishment, then you could at least maybe delay some executions, possibly for a very long time.
Time for some tasty Shiner Bock!
I would like to patent the patent for patenting stupid patents.
Say that five times fast.
The two most common things in the Universe are hydrogen and stupidity. -- Harlan Ellison
The worst part is the fact that the US Patent Office is never going to be funded to get the staff and technology it deserves to weed out the fluff like this. This is because major corporations would be the ultimate losers in that setup. With a better staffed and trained USPTO, most the "business" patents (like that whole "1-Click shopping" thing) would have been shot dead in the water.
But, broken or not, a patent is a patent, but getting royalties on patents is another matter - just ask RAMBUS...
"Oh I see. You resort to brute force when you can't get something by arguing for it..." - Xellos
There's no way this is for real.
Wrong! This is a real patent. Read it.
Contrary to whatever you've been led to believe about the patent office, you CAN get a patent on absolutely anything - it doesn't even have to work. The patent office just files the paper work. It's not until you sue (or get sued) that anybody decides the strength of your patent.
"Licenses are available from the inventor upon request."
:)
Hoo-boy. Does he have a website where school yards across the nation can apply for licences? Is the licence transferable?
Pretty soon children are gonna have to sign a EULA before they hop on a swing.
Most folk'll never lose a toe, and then again some folk'll...
... the "Star" jump. this is a special kind of jump that I and I alone have discovered. It differs from a normal jump in that you throw your arms and legs out to the side while in the air, forming a star shape (hence star jump).
For safety reasons it is advisable to return your legs at least to the vertical position before landing.
A licence fee of $0.02 per jump will apply, and my lawyers will be spot-checking primary schools.
<fnord>OBEY</fnord>
Actually, this method is obvious to any person skilled in the field. In this case, it would not be an engineer but rather a 7-year old kid. Get several kids. Put them on swings. Ask them if they can go sideways without touching the ground.
who said long distance relationships can't work: patent no 6368268
Damn, there goes my patent on hopelessly late April Fools jokes :)
Considering the money that is probably paid, I wouldn't be surprised if you were offered fries with your patent.
==========
Error in module creativity.dll : Unable to create witty comment.
Abort / Retry / Ignore ?
For fsck's sake.
Im away to patent breathing in the name of the UK.
You can breathe if I can swing sideways....
0101100101101111011101010110110101110101011100110
Don't get me wrong, I think software patents are Evil and Rude and I would never patent something actually useful. Any suggestions for stupid things to patent so (a) I get the cash and (b) companyt lawyers go mad trying to enforce something unenforceable (or better: something that would be struck down as a patent when it came to court, so that after I have the cas they realise the patent is unenforcable) received with thanks!
"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." -- Goethe
I may get a patent for the way I pick my nose!
With all those sex sites on the net, you'll make much more money licensing the technology of using porn to cause arousal. While nose picking may be just as common as masturbation, there is way more money in the latter.
Besides, think of the lawsuits from Kleenex if you're invention catches on and results in a drop in tissue sales.
Some people have a way with words, and some people, um, thingy.
Maybe somebody should patent the method of filing stupid patents for obvious methods? That way we could at least sue people when they get through with something like this ;)
It may sound stupid, but I think this would actually be the only way to get people to care about the absurd state of the Patent Office.
Face it: patents, for non-geeks, sound like an incredibly dull subject. They will find it preposterous and silly, but they won't stay tuned long enough to realize the damage it does to the economy. How many typical Joe Americans stay tuned for more than 30 seconds to a political analysis on NPR, C-SPAN or PBS?
Unfortunately, the patents are a "pure real issue". That is, they cannot be reduced to partisanship, a scandal or a psychological "hot button" (like "help the poor", racism, Big Government, abortion, Christian Decency, taxes, gun-control, etc) which seems the only way to gather support for an issue these days.
It takes some real thinking to figure out the role of IP on the economy, and then the role of the Patent Office in there, and then the difference between trademarks, patents, copyrights (because someone will ask about the "patent on Mickey Mouse or Shakespeare").
Even among geeks people care because it has become a psychological hot-button, with most geeks being "for-IP" or "against-IP". If they didn't already advocate one side, they wouldn't probably tune in either.
Now, put ESR or RS on Jerry Springer in a show about "Absurd Patents and the Outrageous Government that Grants Them!" and you'll see more people being aware of the subject than if you throw a rationalistic national campaign. After they already have a position, they might be willing to be convinced.
Freedom is the freedom to say 2+2=4, everything else follows...
Where USPTO's actions can be justifiably questioned is when decisions are made which appear to show that it does not have (enough) examiners with adequate knowledge of the field concerned, IT being, unfortunately, one of these fields. As has been commented before, the remedy is to improve the scrutiny by taking on additional knowledgable examiners, but this isn't something that can be done overnight even if the neccessary resources were approved by government and legislature: ask yourselves what it would take to persuade you to consider such a career, rather than working in the "real world".
I hope I'm not the only sad bastard that's just ran outside to the nearest park (first time in DECADES) to try out this 'better' method of swinging?
Everybody keeps forgetting that the job of the
patent office is not to judge patents, its just
to grant them and to make sure it is a 'new'
patent (ie. it doesnt exist in the patent-DB).
To enforce such a patent, that's an entirely
different matter. (your swings are using my
patented motion?)
real funny, the French say it too...
Read the patent. It states the method for a swing suspended by two chains from a tree branch. Since the playground swing I used has a pipe frame instead of a tree branch, this patent does not apply to my horizontal swinging done in grade school. The swing we had at home used ropes instead of two chains. He has patented a specific implimentation of the horizontal swing method on a specific type equipment. (two chains and one tree branch) I'm glad he didn't patent spinning in circles on a swing.
The truth shall set you free!
Those who can, do. Those who cannot, teach. Those who cannot teach, manage. Those who can neither do nor teach nor manage, and are generally clueless, work at a patent office.
SIG: TAKE OFF EVERY 'CAPTAIN'!!
Which nob head at the Patents Office was on crack when this got approved?
/Me patents reading Slashdot.
loply.com
Nobody will ever be sued for infringement.
Probably, but the problem with patents is that you can never be sure, can you? Unlike with trademark, which is subject to dilution, patents can be allowed to exist as long as the term is granted and even on the last day, someone can sue another person (even if they ignore someone standing next to them doing the same thing--it's totally up to them). It's a great harassment tool.
The fact that such a waste of the taxpayers' money was able to go through the system indicates just how easy it is to do...provided you can afford a patent lawyer. If not, you're SOL.
Corporations patent things largely because they fear just these things--so everybody sets up a system where they think they can scare everyone else from suing them because they might also be sued for some obscure patent. In effect, they don't expect anyone to NOT violate their patents--they just want it to make sure you can't sue them over one of yours.
That is an increasing trend in law. Laws and regulations exist not to be adhered to, but to insure that someone has broken some law and that fact can be used against them as leverage. So if the city decides they can't afford eminent domain (where they have to pay you usually below-market prices for any property of yours they take to widen a road, for example), they simply find you guilty of one of the many ordinances they have and stick you with a massive fine--unless you agree to settle with them for the property they want.
The danger with this is, aside from the obvious abuses, that it degrades respect for the law. Eventually, it fuels a very combative relationship with the government--which, combined with the size and intrusiveness of modern government is why you can't even drive past the White House on one side anymore. They're afraid of you.
So no, this patent by itself isn't anything to worry about...it's a symptom of the larger set of problems, not all of which have to do purely with the patent office.
Rsync file synch. Very technical. Very useful. Prior art widely available. They're never going to catch on if you change file to database or the like (bitstream etc.).
I expect cash.
Read it a little more closely:
Sorry, I think you're gonna have to pay up...
In other news, a bunch of SlashDot readers have obtained a patent on "A Method For Simultaneous Perambulatory Motion and Masticating a Pliable Sticky Artificially Colored and Flavored Confection"
Eh? It just wordwraps. Ive been wondering wtf you people are talking about all the time lol. Which browser(s) is vulnerable? Or shouldnt I ask - MSIE?.
loply.com
What's this guy going to do ...hit up all the kiddies on the playground for thier lunch money...and if that doesn't work sue the parents for the iresponsable actions of the child for patent infringment...DUH
Just Limin' Mon
So when a joke RFC is submitted, it's a fun joke, but when the patent office has a joke patent, they're morons? C'mon, it's a joke. Laugh.
Be wary of any facts that confirm your opinion.
This story was covered on NPR over the weekend with a fluff/human interest angle. Sorry, couldn't find it in their archives.
The NPR story mentioned that the patent holder's father is a patent attorney. (The patent holder is a 10-12 year old boy.) There was no suggestion that the patent was filed to raise awareness of problems with patent law, but I can't help but think that's the case.
Folks, this is mostly an amusement patent. The inventor was a seven year old, and of course he's not the first to invent it. But his dad's a patent lawyer and wrote it up for him on a lark.
Couldn't a patent of this type (or the cat one) be used as a defense in a patent-infringment case?
I mean: you claim that whatever you infringed is obvious and use those examples to demonstrate that the the fact of being approved by the USPTO is in no way a guarantee of quality, inventiveness or anything. The idea is basically to kill the image of the USPTO as a reliable source and thus undermine every patent issued.
I claim prior art.
Furthermore, I have a method to expand the range to anything from 1/2 Hz up to 6Hz.
Be wary of any facts that confirm your opinion.
Oh my GOD this is FUNNY!!
.. (or is it?).
Wait, no it isn't.
Yes it is! HAHA!
Er no! It's lame shit like this that makes the US government the laughing stock of the world! At least this isn't harmful
HAHA.
-- Note: If you don't agree with me, don't bother replying. I won't read it.
Here is my letter which I sent this morning:
Rep. Morella:
I am writing today with further concern of regarding the U.S. Patent Office. The U.S. Patent Office and its antiquated practices are working against the very purpose it was created for, furthering American innovation and invention. Instead, in recent years, it has shown that it cannot keep up with the rapidly growing pace of technology and has not been applying proper standards to evaluating prior art. There have been several cases over the past five years where patents that are harmful to my industry, the Internet, and the technology industry have been granted. These patents, which have ample prior art, only induce frivolous lawsuits and draw my industry into the quagmire of costly legal debate, not to protect the rights of inventors, but to further corporate coffers.
The reason that I write today is because a frivolous, non-technology patent was granted on April 9th. Patent 6,368,227 was granted for "Method of swinging on a swing", and describes a method in which a person swinging on a playground swing could swing sideways. This patent is the best indicator that the U.S. Patent Office needs serious review.
I call upon you to investigate this matter further, and if the investigation warrants, bring this topic up for debate within the House of Representatives. It is time that we begin to fix those areas of Government that are not performing their prescribed duty and return them to working for the people again.
I sig, therefore I am.
It was probably a joke.
I didn't think so. This patent stands.
I propose a new moderation level for this type of posts: "Hillarious", it would cost 2 moderation points but only add +1 to the post's Score.
echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
Didn't McDonalds do a fine job of spinning that case in their favor, even though they lost?
Now everyone points to it as an example of frivolousness, although it is actually not the best exemplar of this phenomenon.
What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey
The user may even choose to produce a Tarzan-type yell while swinging in the manner described, which more accurately replicates swinging on vines in a dense jungle forest. Actual jungle forestry is not required.
If they don't get a C&D from one, they'll be hearing from another.
Mod Karma -1: I sed bad wurds. If I cep my mouf shut, I wud be at riyses.
I wonder if this guy would license his invention to me in exchange for a license on my invention covering: "A fun and pleasurable method of oscillating the hand on the penis in a jerking motion."
Seriously though he deserves major props for what looks like an expensive and clever-ass prank.
So does this mean the Patent Office now implicitly agrees that they think patents are silly, too?
That just gave me an idea, issue a patent for approval that patents the process of patenting silly things.
Either they will have to find prior art (there are tons but I doubt they have the balls to point them out), or grant the patent.
And if they grant the patent, you can collect fees from anyone who 'infringes' on your invention.
Voila, no more silly patents.
echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
How many more of these before the gov't decides to re-design the US patent system? I mean, this is SO incredibly funny, but at the same time, it's quite disturbing...
Friend: "The NIC is misconfigured..." Me: "No prob, I'll just telnet in and fix it." *Silence*
Mail this to CNN or some other news site that most Americans read. If the general public learns about this then there will be an outrage and changes may be made to the patent office. Any complaints slashdotters send in is only a fraction of a percent of the number of Americans out there.
Outdoor digital photography, mostly in New Engl
Moderation Totals: Troll=1, Redundant=1, Total=2.
And probably this one too.... hell i found it funny
Burning karma, just for shits and giggles....
OK, has anyone patented twisting the ropes a few dozen times, before lifting ones feet off the ground causing the user to twist very quickly in the opposite direction?
;-)
(Thereby inducing dizzyness)
And if not, should we club together and get this one? Might make a fortune
The more advanced the technology, the more open it is to primitive attack
with a patent on a sideways swing? Force new films to cough up some cash for some kid in a movie swinging in a sideways manner without permission? Argh..
proton != antielectron
Here it is:
To: usptoinfo@uspto.gov
Subject: Patents
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 09:05:08 -0300
Hi. I am a swing researcher, and in my advanced studies to find out how kids swing, I came to the conclusion that 99.38% +-0.62 of
the average american kid has swong sideways, at least once in his lifetime. This study was conducted with careful observation of
2.495.487 kids swinging, and took 10 years of my life.
So I guess my research pretty much conflicts with patent # 6,368,227 (Olson April 9, 2002).
Shall I publicize my findings ?
Or can I be sued if I do so ?
TIA.
If only I had published my sideways swinging method in the New England Journal of Swinging 27 years ago, I would now have documented prior art! Curse you Steven Olson! Curse your cold black heart!
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
That Olson guys sounds like a man with a great sense of humor. I'll bet he'd give a great Slashdot interview.
Slashdot readers should start patenting things, and we could vote on the most absurd patent that gets approved. It only counts if you announce your intentions before filing.
People will won't see this an example of general bad patent granting policies, they'll just see it as a mistake.
I'm hoping to obtain a patent for "Utilizing the methane producing capabilitites of sybiotic colonic microbes to produce sound pressure waves emitted from the anus modulated by sphinctal muscle control".
This is my 1000th post! w00t!
I think the monkeys would actually do a better job. Many of these patents would insult the patent monkey's intelligence.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
I got dibs on the bubble sort!
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
http://www.ipo.org/PTODay_99.htm - here the name of Peter L. Olson is mentioned. He seems to work for 3M. He makes presentation on prosecution issues - scary..:)
m l
http://www.micropat.com/og/ogn980210/patrequ.ht
He is again listed as attorney for 3M on adjudication of certain patent.
Hey, if he patents masturbation instead, I think Kleenex will still see a drop in sales.
The Red Pill
Excellent troll. You got all the way up to +5 thanks to the crack-smoking moderators. I salute you sir.
Here is the plan.
Step 1: Call this guy and buy a License to use this patent.
Step 2: Then forcefully slam yourself sideways into the tree.
Step 3: Call injury attorney and wait for the checks to roll in.
There's no "i" in team but there is a "u" in slum.
The Patent clame is only for a swing attached by 2 chanes to a tree.
So any one swinning on a metal framed swing, or a swing with more than 2 chaines, or a conection mecanism not comprising of a chain, will not be effected by this patent
Wouldn't it be nice if schools got all the money they wanted and the army had to hold jumble sales for guns
It's time for Uncle Bob's Patent Violation Madness!
That's right...
I'm going to sit in a swing, swing sideways,
and entertain my cat with a laser pointer!
And if he's not scared, I might even yell like Tarzan.
Mr. Olson, you sir, are a genius.
Sometimes it's better not to take credit for something. The next time you or your kid gets hurt on a swing of this design, sue the patent holder.
It is so unfortunate that the government would allow such a thing to happen. Patent a motion/movement? That's like trying to patent a specific walk or how to hail a taxi or even a dance step. How about a patent for 'the wave' that you see at sporting events? Just ridiculous. And we wonder about the quality of public servants....
...we are from the government - we are here to help...
...hang around school yards taking down names and addresses of anyone who swings sideways? They'd lock his sorry Butte up. The scary thing is that they let this guy patent a method of using something that already existed. Imagine patenting the method of turning your steering wheel in the direction of a skid in order to regain control of a vehicle. My mother used to use a big screwdriver like a chisel. Is this patentable? How about using a good steel ruler to scratch your own back? Or squeezing the wide sides of a tube of toothpaste to suck the excess back in? Patents on all of these ideas are not only not enforceable, anybody who tried to enforce them would be laughed out of court and possibly committed to a mental institution. That the government would even consider granting them reflects poorly on their collective grasp of reality. But then we already knew that. ;o)
And generally it cheapens the whole value of a patent. Now, my grandfather's uncle patented a "crab-net frame" (#803160) in 1905. The crab-net had been around for quite awhile, especially in Maryland, and nobody in those days would have had the gall to try to patent it, even if there was no such patent in existence at the time. What he did do was invent a better way of attaching the hoop of the net to the handle, and this allowed him to advertize and sell a "patent crab-net" in conjunction with his other blacksmithing and boating-related products, which was a bit of an exaggeration but near enough to the truth. And one could certainly argue that his invention improved the lives of his fellow citizens, especially those engaged in crabbing on the Chesapeake Bay, and that he deserved to be protected from others who might use his invention to unfairly increase their own profits. But what, pray tell me, does this idiotic swinging patent do for anybody? And what possible financial gain could the "inventor" expect to obtain from it? Is he going to sue a movie-maker who shows someone doing it in a film? Like he's going to sue Dreamworks? Or is he going to manufacture swing sets that he will advertize as having the patented ability to swing sideways? Does he think anybody is going to fall for this? Gee, I wonder what the product safety folks would have to say about this.
In the final analysis, somebody needs to teach these characters the meaning of the word "frivolous."
Hic iacet Arthurus, rex quondam rexque futurus.
im generally fine with the idea, although it IS a stupid one. I mean, the guy was probably playing an eloborate joke when he filed for the damn thing.
but...
what gets me is now if I want to swing on MY swing in MY backyard, i need to do this:
"Licenses are available from the inventor upon request."
I now need to pay for the ability to utilise a simple pendulum-like motion for my own enjoment.
I'm sorry, but there's no justification for tissue piracy!
NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
I think lawyers (as well as computer scientists) are simply guilty of creating the system which they work with. Lawyers created the legal system in such a way to require lawyers. Computer scientists have created computer systems to require computer scientists. It's classic self-validation, self-preservation, self-ishness that drives the capitalist USSA.
I think it's wonderful, because you create your own job. I just wish I knew more about law, because that is the fastest growing self-perpetuating system and is probably going to be a VERY good business to be in (it already is).
Lawyers will tell you (and rightfully so) that as the world gets more complex, and the world population grows larger, the possibility of dispute increases accordingly. Of course, they neglect to mention the fact that they are the major cause of dispute..
But, really, it's amazing that 6 or 7 billion people can all pretty much get along on one planet, and really, unfair stuff doesn't happen all that often. But, to remain on topic, it is pretty funny when a system we setup to be foolproof ends up making a fool of us all.
I think this should be a lesson to all the judges out there: they need to take much more into consideration than just a patent application. And they do. If only they couldn't be bribed.
Cool! Amazing Toys.
That reminds me, I have to patent the tire swing.
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
First let me get this out up front - the acceptance of this claim for patent is absolutely ridiculous. Just further proof the USPTO is staffed by McFastFood reject applicants. Now maybe ya'll won't pummel me.
I think the last paragraph sums up the application. "... the swinging method of the present invention may be referred to by the present inventor and his sister...". While it may be a goof, it sounds to me like a dad doing something nice for his kids.
- If we aren't supposed to eat animals, then why are they made out of meat? - Steven Wright
Look, the topic of the inadequacy of the patent office has been brought up on Slashdot several, several times. Now there is incontrovertible proof that the USPTO is incompetent. Why not use this patent as an example in a plea to your legislators to reexamine the methods of patent granting in the United States?
Sen X may not understand the ridiculous nature of One-Click Shopping, but she's bound to know that Sideways Swinging should never have been approved.
Instead of gawking at the absurdity, use it.
AEH
I have an idea. Why don't we get all of the patent holders in America to sign their patents over to the government in the form of a gift certificate? It would benefit the public good, after all.
That way, nobody will want to invent anything ever because they won't be allowed to enjoy the benefit of their hard work. And then we can stand in the middle of empty fields and wonder why our lives are miserable.
Do patents work like trademarks, where if the holder of the patent does not defend it, he loses it?
Sound waves should be free!
However, /more/ money will be lost by kleenex if he patents using porn to cause arousal.
YAWIAR.
Your head of state is a corrupt weasel, I hope you're happy.
Do these moronic drones have ANY CAPACITY FOR THOUGHT?!! There has to be a century of prior art on this, as in, ask any 6 year old kid.
The only "innovation" here is in thinking to file for a patent. I guess these guys are going to go around suing playgrounds for royalties.
If any of these idiots at the USPTO dare to cash their paychecks, they are comitting fraud. This madness has got to stop.
=== The price of freedom is eternal vigilance
...that the USPTO is not responsible for the patents it has granted. If they were responsible, then someone could sue them for issuing a bad patent. That would certainly get their attention.
Hey, you issued those guys a bad patent, causing our company to go through a very expensive legal process. We are suing you for $25M damages and legal fees that we wouldn't have suffered if you hadn't screwed up.
The rear doors of the van burst open and ATF agents stream out and into the playground, ringing the preschoolers with their automatic weapons at the ready. Little Tommy pees his pants.
The preschoolers are handcuffed with zip ties and escorted solemnly back to the van to be shipped to Leavenworth, Kansas for 14 years of hard labor.
So any one swinning on a metal framed swing, or a swing with more than 2 chaines, or a conection mecanism not comprising of a chain, will not be effected by this patent
However, I swung from a swing connected to a branch of a tree, originally connected with rope, later replaced by chain. This was done at my uncle's and I can claim prior are minimally back to the mid 1950's (that's the earliest I can remember being out at their place on the swing).
What gets me is that this thing could even go through the patent process. Are the ones reviewing them so sheltered in their lives they never sat on a swing as a kid and went sideways? Even on a regular swing set with multiple swings it was done, one just ran into the swing next to it, but who cared. It also shows the lunacy of those who'd even attempt such a filing. There should be a 'frivilous filing' fine as there can be for frivilous legal suits.
The patent is about using chains, so if i use ropes instead will i be affected?
Unfortunately, I think the only mastermind was the attorney who wrote this up and submitted it as a joke. It may gotten through as an accident, as a statement, or through a sense of humour on the part of the examiner, but based on a bit of additional research I'm guessing that the attorney knew that he would have a pretty good shot at landing this patent without any extra help from the inside.
Based on USPTO web site searches, the primary examiner listed on the patent appears to focus on toys, amusement devices (and methods), and decorative items such as jewellery. With increasing frequency (50 since October), he has been the primary examiner on nearly 700 patents over the past 5 or so years, and assistant examiner on about 300 prior to that. Seems pretty busy - anyone know how that compares to the average rate?
Going through these search results gives a quick review of the patents in this area and to anyone over 6 years old or not otherwise "skilled in the art" of toys, many of these patents seems pretty funny. I'll leave it to someone else to pull out their favourites, but while I'm sure many of these are very legitimate for this particular area, a lot of these "amusement" or "ornamental" patents seem suspect from the get-go.
I wouldn't be surprised if the attorney was aware of the types and numbers of patents in this area in particular and choose an amusement method not only because it would be silly, but also because he thought it would have a real chance to get through, based on the current practise and the workload of the examiners.
While I wouldn't place the examiner as the likely mastermind behind this, I don't mean to single him out either. The attorney doesn't appear to have any past history with this examiner, and I bet it could have gotten past any number of others working in the same category.
While I think this is really funny and "mostly harmless" (until someone references the scope of this one in their next patent), I think we can probably legitimately chalk up this patent as another symptom of an overworked and poorly designed patent system, and not simply the outcome of an inside joker or an office activist.
My next sig will be ready soon, but friends can beat the rush!
See also Chapter 10 Patentability of Inventions. Or here for a summary.
The interesting question is, did Olsen violate his oath in applying for this, or was he serious?
You can just see some USPTO guys getting phone calls... "the site's not up!" "That's odd ... we must have been hacked!" "Where's all the traffic coming from?" "All over the net, but it's all referred from slash-dot-dot-org." "They must be some evil, anti-Microsoft, anti-IP ... anti-_American_ site, then. Call up the Dept of the Interior ... target the missiles for Slash dot dot org..."
/.'ing as a "malicious effort to impair the public's access to microsoft-provided technology. Which will be true, because the USPTO was a) wholly purchased from the US gov't. and b) now only allows the download of WinPDFs ... PDF files that have transferred functionality previously in hardware to Windows ...
Then micros~1 invokes some provision in the CDBTSSPASSDMSSCA to classify the
And you though WinModems and WinWiFi were bad...
I never got the patent law information but from my little inquiry, my limited understanding leads me to believe that this is a perfect case for negligence per se, which is when you don't actually have to prove negligence, it is just understood that the act is so blatantly negligent that you don't have to argue why the reasonable professional would not have performed said act (like amputating the wrong leg). However as somone else posted, it is possible the rules and restrictions of patent law protect the patent examiner in this case, and I am not sure who would be the appropriate party to bring a suit against this guy, but I would love to see someone try.
I can see it now.
"w00t! f1rst p4nt3nt!"
Any word on license fees or where to get a license? It's such a nice day today. Argh! It's killing me! I want to try this out now!
cygnuhchur
That would force the govt/s to reform the patent registration process.
The Swing Connection ought to be careful in the future not to infringe on the author's sideways look and feel concept.
Inventor of the LOLbalrog meme.
The prior art and other patents listed are actually interesting. One is for an original swing, and another is for an indoor swing. Both have relatively lengthy prior art sections as well. Interesting reading.
I think where the patent office went wrong was that they started allowing concepts to be patented. Inventions or processes are fine as there is a defineable method you go through to get a result. A specific engine, chemical process, etc. But allowing patents for a one-click shopping system? For swinging in a circle? How can they sign off on these things?
Without the protection of a monopoly on their methods, children would not have a sufficient incentive to play. Imagine a world where the children do not play. That would be aweful. You don't hate children, do you?
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
the people who work at the patent office.
Of course they let this through to make a point
about the patent process itself. Obviously things
have to be fixed from the outside.
When a child acts out in stupid ways, possibly hurting themselves, it is often called a "cry for help." Perhaps this is just the final straw. Granting the 1-click patent was a call by the lowly clerks to give them better funding, better education and make the process more logical, we didn't listen.
Then they went and ostensibly called for public comments and ignored the responses. Again, a classic cry for help; persisting in destructive behavior despite signs to stop.
Now we have come to this, an official temper-tantrum on the part of the USPTO. You might sum it up as: "You won't give me what I need to do my job, FINE! I'm gonna patent Everything See how you like that!!!."
Fellow Americans, fellow parents, of the poor neglected USPTO, it is time to listen to our child, and give them back the ability to do their damn job.
The word you are looking for is irony. Sarcasm is more direct. Sarcasm: "What a sniveling twit." Irony: "Oh yeah, he's a genius".
My other Slashdot ID is much lower.
>But his dad's a patent lawyer and wrote it up for him on a lark. My Uncle is a DA in Washington, maybe I should get him to write me a new law or amend the constitution on a lark! Ha, Ha! Won't that be funny? I know, he can show me how you take away rights of minority groups and put them in "special" camps. Oh man, good times.
This is abviously an April Fool's day joke that was so lame it took two weeks to surface.
I'm a 2000 man.
Please use trademark names properly to reduce trademark dilution. From now on, it's "Kleenex (R) brand facial tissues".
Sincerely,
Kimberly-Clark(R) Corporation
(R) Registered trademark of Kimberly-Clark Corporation (C) 1938, 1986, 2000 KCC. All rights reserved
I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
- Show junior what dad does at work all day.
- Point out that our patent system needs some reforms.
- Provides a lot of advertizing for Dad's business.
I'm not sure what Dad intended at the start, but the last item is surely the most valuable to him now.Seriously. If you have a person who's genetically engineered, they contain patented materials. Just as the seed industry (Monsanto?) sues farmers that save seeds for reuse, why not sue people for this? If they pass their genetic immunity to this disease to the next generation (without paying a royalty to the company), how will the poor widdle company make its money back? :P
Best. Comment. Ever. Enjoy!
It looks like Peter Olson is a patent attorney for 3M (Which is based in St. Paul - the address in the patent) Look at these couple of documents that talk about a "Peter L Olson" First document and second document
From the last paragraph of the patent it states "the present invention may be referred to by the present inventor and his sister as "Tarzan" swinging."
I'm going to guess that Peter Olson is dad and he gave his son, Steven, a gift of his very own patent. A pretty cool hack of the patent system if you ask me. Also goes to show how screwed up the system is.
A little poking at Mapquest and you can get a good aerial view the tree that inspired the patent as well.
Evidence of prior fart?
You got it.
Page widening posts don't affect Mozilla.
I haven't tried Konq or Opera, but IE definitely supports page widening posts.
If you're tired of obvious patents like this, then do something about it! This patent is a golden opportunity to shine some light on the disgrace that the patent office has become. This is a smoking gun!
The computer industry suffers increasingly from bad patents being granted on obvious techniques which are far from novel. This trend is obvious to us, but not so clearcut to those outside the industry. An XOR cursor may be obvious to a programmer, but sounds quite novel and non-obvious to a layperson. This patent should be blatently obvious to anyone, including your elected representatives!
Everyone who reads Slashdot and hates to see obvious patents should print out this patent, schedule a face-to-face meeting with their elected representatives, show them this ridiculous patent and use it to drive home the point we've been trying to make for years -- that the patent office is out of control and completely ignoring the "novel and non-obvious" standards that the law sets before patent protection is warranted. If enough of us do this, Congress might actually get the hint and start taking patent reform seriously. And this patent doesn't require them to take our word for it; they can see for themselves how absurd this patent is! It doesn't matter if this patent was requested as a lark; it was granted and has the full force of law behind it.
We need Congress to be outraged about this patent as an example of the corruption in the system. Whether or not this particular patent could or would ever be enforced is irrelevant; if patents are granted on obvious methods, it harms the public interest by granting a legal monopoly on the obvious. That impedes progress and economic growth, endangers companies and jobs, and erodes public trust and confidence in the government -- all things that Congress ought to care about...
Deven
"Simple things should be simple, and complex things should be possible." - Alan Kay
However, this is not in the CLAIMS of the patent, and therefore the patent is ONLY valid for a swing that is suspended by chains from a treebranch. In addition, the treebranch should be substantially horizontal. This patent is (purposely?) very narrow. It is clear to me that this patent was filed as a joke, and/or to show that the USPTO is really not up to the task of reviewing the patents that it receives. Maybe if we get enough "drops" like this, the bucket will finally overflow, and the whole patent-system will be reviewed and restructured.
I'm hoping to obtain a patent for "Utilizing the methane producing capabilitites of sybiotic colonic microbes to produce sound pressure waves emitted from the anus modulated by sphinctal muscle control".
If that ever goes to trial would someone need to demonstrate their "prior art" before the judge?
You can teach a "how-to" on filling out forms without actually processing them and granting patents. This isn't someone handing out a little platic pair of pilot's wings to kid who fly - this is a real, live patent number with the force of law behind it. The fact that the applicant was 7 or that he has no intention of pressing the claim is irrelevant. At best, this makes for an annoyance and a public one at that. At worst, I'd be willing to go so far as to say someone in the USPTO abused his position. It's not like I can have MY daughter go ahead and fill out the forms and get her patent for folding her shirts listed with a real number for all the world to see. If what you say is true, then I agree no real harm was done, but I question the propriety of using a government office for your own personal schoolroom for your kids.
Sorry, I think you're gonna have to pay up
When I pay up, it will be proof positive of prior art. I graduated HS in the '70's and haven't done much on a swing set since.
The truth shall set you free!
> A method of swing on a swing is disclosed, in which a user positioned on a standard swing > suspended by two chains from a substantially horizontal tree branch induces side to side motion > by pulling alternately on one chain and then the other. Whew... All my childhood swinging activities, which included side to side, diagonal, elliptical, etc. motions was done with a swing suspended by two chains from a man-made metal framework, so I guess I'm safe. If/when I have kids someday, they're going to be using similar metal-framework swingsets so that I won't get sued then either. Hmmm, if he can do this, perhaps I should get some patents, like arranging grains of sand using plastic containters as molds to form a castle shape, arranging small pieces of plastic using some form of adhesive to generate the shapes of cars, airplanes, etc. and then patent the act of standing underneath something which is impervious to water (perhaps someone will name this device a "roof"), as a method of staying dry during a period of time when small droplets of water are falling from the sky.
There are an awful lot of computer programming patents that, to any competent programmer, are as obvious and silly as this. But since it's outside of most people's expertise, it's impossible to argue that fact to non-programmers, and the patent-holder gets away with statements about protecting all the hard work that went into their intellectual property.
from USPTO corrections page:
"Any person may file a request for reexamination of a patent, along with the required fee, on the basis of prior art consisting of patents or printed publications. At the conclusion of the reexamination proceedings, a certificate setting forth the results of the reexamination proceeding is issued."
from there fees page:
147 1.20(c)(1) Request for ex parte reexamination 2,520.00
099 1.20(c)(2) Request for inter partes reexamination 8,800.00
it is sad that getting a re-examination is about 10 times more expensive then filing a claim.
I wonder what the Bars official view is a lawyers who waste texpayer money, file something they know can't hold up in court is?
going to have to find out.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Nope. Sarcasm assumes irony. Check the definition. Calling someone a sniveling twit is only sarcastic if you have a high opinion of them, but they prefer that you didn't, which is a farly rare situation, I would guess.
"If you're thinking what I'm thinking, you're right." -
If you would like to discuss this patent with the inventor or the attorney I believe you can do so with this number.
Olson, Peter L
337 Otis Ave
Saint Paul, MN 55104
651-645-2251
Some intern at the PTO thought it was funny and decided to pass it...
http://www.blitzbasic.com/
Graphics3D 640, 480
Wow. This is revolutionary. The gentleman receiving the patent has developed a way to cause a pendulum to travel in an oval orbit as opposed to the more common elliptical orbit.
An oval is, of course, asymmetric about the "short" axis (just like an egg) whereas an ellipse is symmetric about both axes.
Give me my freedom, and I'll take care of my own security, thank you.
Just you wait. My patent for affixing a rope to a tire and then suspending it from a tree will soon be accepted by the Patent Office. Then, I'll let the royalties start rolling in.
That's great, I can already see the headline stories:
"Boy, 8 years of age, sent to prison for 30 years to life, for infringing on patent for the third time."
"Six year old girl agrees to pay two gummy bears, one red, one green, to settle patent infringement claims..."
Obviously, Kien Nguyen is an incompetent boobie, and aught to be fired as quickly as his fat supervisor will allow.
--
You sure got a purty mouth...
I wonder if I can patent putting your pants on one leg at a time... then I just need to copyright the phrase and I'll be set for life!
--- I used to moderate, then I read the -1 articles and decided having to filter through them was not worth it.
How nice. So the tax-payer is now the one responsible for paying for the various overhead that such an "amusement" patent generates.
Coming as this does at tax-time, my "amusement" threshold is rather low.
That Jesus Christ guy is getting some terrible lag... it took him 3 days to respawn! -NJ CoolBreeze
Young children often need help to climb onto a swing, and may need a push (sometimes even an "underdog" push) to begin swinging
Nice to know the USPTO will still permit the unlicensed use of underdoggies for my 2-year-old!
A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess? - Joshua (Wargames)
Maybe if we all inundate the USPTO with stupid crap like this, they won't have time to get to the truly scary stuff entities like Microsoft are trying to use them to do.
P.
So, who wants to come down to the park with me and round some of the patent infringing scoundrels up?
I want to patent kicking this guy's ass for doing something this stupid. Prior art, anybody?
I really hate signatures, but go to my website.
I think I am going to patent jacking off with an opposite hand. That way I can charge all you guys one dead kitten each time.
Anyone else notice this? The owner of the patent is one Olson; Steven. The Attorney/Agent/Firm is one Olson; Peter Lowell. You don't need to hire a lawyer as long as you're related to one ;-)
I'd have to say to you what I said to the original poster (although to him I was using *irony*, I guess you americans don't quite get it). Surely you realised that I had detected the obvious irony in his remark. Some people eh? :D
True, I doubt I have a photo of it, but it's obviously a joke patent, so the patentee realises that it's something most people have done. The whole point of technology is that you are using things people have done before in new ways, else you'd be doing science.
So if I can figure a way to patent the patent process itself can I pantently prevent all future and pending patents??
Here? on slashdot? I'll take your word for it, but the far more likely suggestion around here is cluelessness.
slashdot, where even Meryl Streep fans can moderate (http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=30557&cid=32
:)
hawk
While we're at it, we can also do the same with SUN, Apple, Intel, IBM, and--you name it! Golly, if all of us get together we can invalidate the patent system even moreso than it already is! [not]
I know that some on-line database systems use ficticious records to prevent data theft. Could
this be one of these cases? Did anyone verify the existance of this pattent from another source?
-- &&
Has anyone considered the possibility that he filed for this patent to make an example of how stupid the patent office is? I know I've done stuff like this before, usually involving the grad students who "graded" my physics homework. It could be that Mr. Olsen finds this to be just as absurd as the rest of us.
-Colin
That paragraph doesn't matter, because the claims refer specifically to chains and tree branches and don't allow for any alternatives. For the patent to cover it, it has to be in the claims. The rest is essentially just commentary to clarify what the claims mean.
:-)
IANAL! I do have one granted patent, though.
I guess it's now safe for me to disclose a patent-pending process I've developed for swing-powered flight. It involves the more traditional leg-pump forward/backward swinging, so I don't believe I'll owe any royalties on the side-swinging patent.
My process can be performed at any stage of swinging, but maximum effectiveness is obtained when the chains or ropes become momentarily slack at the outer range of motion.
At this point, the swing operator would reposition their arms so that their elbows are (and here's the important part) in front of the chains. Then at the edge of the forward motion arc, the operator uses his/her arms to lift up slightly of the swing and releases their grip on the chains/ropes. The forward momentum provides for a brief period of flight.
I'm also working on an alternate means of forward propulsion that I've decided to call "skipping."
Slashdot comments... splitting hairs since 1997.
I am about to fill out a apply for a patent on the method of applying for a patent through the US Patent Office. I shall document all the possible methods and ad in a clause to include variations on said methods. Reply to me now to be listed as a co-inventor.
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
Or should I say a circular transportation facilitation device?
In a society that believes in nothing, fear becomes the only agenda ~ Bill Durodié
You're right on, d00d. This HAS to be a joke.
Any bets on if it'll turn up as a story on The Daily Show(tm)?
Brak: What's THAT?
Thundercleese: A light switch.. of TOTAL DEVASTATION!
Well, you definitely don't have a patent on a spellchecker, buddy!
Never fight naked, unless you're in prison...
> It's those damn kids that are sharing kleenex
>that are causing the drop in sales.
It's not the drop in sales that concerns me, it's the spread of disease.
Call for Kleenex exchange programs in your city NOW.
-l
This was a question on the NPR Quiz show "Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me" last week.
/.
I thought the answer was false because I hadn't seen it on
Oh well...
-twb
No, not over the internet, cause that's illegal. Just get a whole bunch of people to submit many, many patent requests every day. Since they're "understaffed" this would have the effect equivalent to a distributed DoS attack on a windoze95 box. Who's with me?
Mandatory drug testing for the patent reviewers! Gov workers have a tendancy to "drift" without some supervision.
I wonder what else they patented under LSD?
Table-ized A.I.
No one who ever proposes the infinite number of monkeys solution ever stops to think about the monkey shit. Or how much banannas would set them back...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Government organizations suffer from this as well. The reputation of all government organizations suffer from the "Leno effect" when the late night shows ridicule the behavior of a bad government office. This is surely such an example.
The Patent Office finding that swinging from a tree branch on two ropes/chains is patentable (2002, Patent #6,368,227, see appended text) is so unbelievable, so idiotic, and so blatently bad that just knowing that the beaurocractic beast is able to generate such stupidity makes be wonder if other government "truths" are also of any value. I think I'll start smoking and start driving a 1976 Plymouth Fury wagon with the big engine (4 m.p.g., contributes more global warming gases that the average 3rd world country burning rain forests to cook rats and monkeys).
Apparently, the Patent Office standard operating procedure (S.O.P.) is to issue first, then let merit be determined based on subsequent challenges. Of course, this patent fails the challenge, but in the meantime the US Patent Office takes another publicity hit. Ironically, since the Patent Office is probably not involved in the litigation, this is possibly a cost-effective (for the taxpayers) way to handle patents, although it looks a lot like a W.P.A. for lawyers. By approving everything, the resulting litigation is between competing patent lawyers paid by private companies rather than between a private company and the US Patent Office.
And, for a free market, the real problem is most certainly in the Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt (FUD) a letter from an organization claiming "we own a patent that covers your work" can cause in a development environment.
It might appear that the solution lies in bringing the costs of undefenseable patents back to the patent holder, at least then they would do a reasonable "due-diligence" search against existing patents and prior art before they filed. As NewtonsLaw pointed out in the parent post, this might make patents too expensive for the little guy.
Bottom line, a patent is like a copyright, and has no real value unless you can afford the lawyers to get your money out of infringers or can make money off the original work.
If they can afford their product website atticghost.com, they are probably laughing all the way to the bank.
It looks like they are marketing the hell out of it. They just had another patent issued too.
At least they believe in it!