Slashdot Mirror
Using the USPTO Against Itself
fidget42 writes: "This article in the LA Times tells of how a scientist went about using the patent office as a mechanism for trying to force a change in that office's rules. To quote from the article: 'Nearly 10 years ago, a friend called Stuart Newman with an intriguing challenge: Could he think up a new form of life that would be scientifically useful and possible to patent--yet so disturbing that the public would recoil?' Could the same be done with the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) concerning software patents? I know some companies have used the rules of the USPTO to 'spoof' it, most notably Despair, Inc.'s trademarking of the frowney."
"A Method to Force the USPTO to Behave in a Dignified Manner" perhaps?
And afterwards the lawyers took over, and issued patent-applications (and getting them approved) for everything under the sun, even if it's not man made.
Witness patents on DNA. No - they won't charge you for running around with one of their genes, but they will charge you, if you get the idea that you want to know, if it's inside your body, because they have patented any process linked to checking for that specific gene; witness the 2,000 odd dollars it costs in royalties to a specific company, if you want to see if you are carrying the breast cancer gene. No, it doesn't matter what process you use - you want to know if it's there, you have to pay.
Some patents are good, some are bad, and some should be taken out side and shot!
I wholehartedly agree with a poster on Slashdot who once said something to the effect of:
Change the standard procedure, and reject all patent applications by default. If the applicant can't make a good enough case as to why the patent should be granted, then the invention isn't worth patenting.
We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
Patents such as #6,293,874 ("User-operated amusement apparatus for kicking the user's buttocks...a user-operated and controlled apparatus for self-infliction of repetitive blows to the user's buttocks by a plurality of elongated arms bearing flexible extensions that rotate under the user's control.") and #6,368,227 ("Method of swinging on a swing," discussed recently in Slashdot) certainly sound as if SOMEONE is trying to prove SOMETHING.
I'm strongly tempted to mail copies of these patents to my congressman with a letter saying, simply, "The patent office is broken. Fix it."
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!