Slashdot Mirror


Some Of The Lost X-Patents Found

Jerry Browne writes " The New York Times (reg req) is carrying a story about the recent discovery of some lost patents. Apparantly a fire at a temporay storage site in July 1836 destroyed the first 10000 patents issued. From the article..."The Patent and Trademark Office has issued nearly seven million patents; the first 10,000 are known as the X-patents. They were issued from July 1790, when the United States patent system was created under an order signed by George Washington, to July 1836, when every one of them burned in a fire...In the 168 years since the fire, only about 2,800 have been recovered....Until this spring, that is, when two lawyers...a clue to several important patents from the 1790's - including one from 1826 for the first internal combustion engine...""

281 comments

  1. No Subscribe Link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
  2. Only good can come by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe this will invalidate some crazy patents that will now have expired.

  3. Burned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Maybe some of the new tech patents will 'accidently' get burned.. we can only hope

    1. Re:Burned by Piranhaa · · Score: 1

      We have Windows for that...

    2. Re:Burned by RLW · · Score: 5, Funny

      Don't forget to burn everyone who filed one of these insipid patents written in bombastic pseudo techno/legalese.

      Build a fire for a patent lawyer and keep him warm for a day.
      Set a patent lawyer on fire and keep him warm for the rest of his life.

    3. Re:Burned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Build a fire for a patent lawyer and keep him warm for a day.
      Set a patent lawyer on fire and keep him warm for the rest of his life.


      Aren't patent lawyers already going to be "on fire" for the rest of their afterlives?

    4. Re:Burned by sparcnut · · Score: 1
      Maybe some of the new tech patents will 'accidently' get burned.. we can only hope
      I think I'll patent the burning of patents...
      --
      perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10);'
    5. Re:Burned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Set a fire...
      Set afire...
      Flame bait, indeed. Get it right next time.

    6. Re:Burned by Demonspawn · · Score: 5, Funny

      Actually, works better phrased this way:

      Set a patent lawyer a fire and keep him warm for a day.
      Set a patent lawyer afire and keep him warm for the rest of his life.

      Extremly humorous that your post is moded 'flamebait' tho ;)

      --Demonspawn

    7. Re:Burned by glesga_kiss · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Who's to say that these old ones were "accidently" burned in the first place? Didn't the US get a major boost when it was a fledging nation by ignoring patents and copyright from the old world? The mention of one for the internal combustion engine makes me wonder...didn't Henry T Ford stick his middle finger up at patents?

      Mmmm, several hundred year old consipracy. This is gonna drive 'em nuts for years... ;-)

    8. Re:Burned by ChairmanMeow · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, there's prior art for that from 1836.

      --
    9. Re:Burned by Yewbert · · Score: 1
      Maybe some of the new tech patents will 'accidently' get burned.. we can only hope

      Burned, hell - maybe some of them will be invalidated by prior art in these just-re-found X-patents!

    10. Re:Burned by Anubis350 · · Score: 1

      since everything is computerized these days, and the /. effect is well established, just post a link here to the server they're stored on....

      --
      "goodbye and hello, as always" ~Prince Corwin, from Zelazny's Amber series
    11. Re:Burned by cowbutt · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Maybe some of the new tech patents will 'accidently' get burned.. we can only hope

      Actually, no. At least not the ones that genuinely are innovative.

      I'd quite like to see the expiry date on all of them mysteriously reduce by 2/3rds or so, but I'd hate to see that ingenuity lost forever and need to be re-invented.

      The problem with tech patents is that the tech industry is still incredibly immature and developing at a rapid rate. Patent durations that make sense for mechanical devices aren't really appropriate for tech patents at this stage in the game.

      Eventually, I'd like to see patents and copyrights "self-tune" according to some metric like the median number of registered works per capita (i.e. if almost everyone in the country has a few hundred registered works in their name - as opposed to their slavemaster^Wemployer's name - then it would appear hardly any protection is necessary as somehow people are innovating and creating and managing to make doing so a profitable enterprise). I expect this would integrate well with rms' thoughts on "functional" (i.e. programs, devices), "creative" (fiction, music) and "representative" (memoirs, manifestos) works (see section 7 of linked article).

      --

    12. Re:Burned by johnnyb · · Score: 1

      "Didn't the US get a major boost when it was a fledging nation by ignoring patents and copyright from the old world?"

      But those patents weren't registered w/ the US PTO.

    13. Re:Burned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Youre wrong, Henry Ford received several patents. Most people don't realize that Ford did not invent the automobile, but the automotive assembly line, along with many other automotive devices such as the transmission.

      It's too bad so many people on this site have such an ignorant attitude toward the patent system.

    14. Re:Burned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ford did not invent nor claim to invent neither the internal combustion engine nor the .

    15. Re:Burned by rebelcool · · Score: 1

      Alot of countries have done this. In post-WWII japan, Canon's first 35mm camera was a part-for-part copy of a Leica. Its designer disassembled the Leica, sketched each part and had them reproduced locally (and for much cheaper)

      --

      -

    16. Re:Burned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, are you really a demon spawn? That's pretty awesome. Question--say someone kills you (like, oh, I don't know, Hellboy or someone cool enough to do so); do you have to suffer in hell for your sins, or is that only for people, and you get to frolic or something?

    17. Re:Burned by Ingolfke · · Score: 1

      Henry T Ford... T is for tickle?

    18. Re:Burned by morleron · · Score: 1

      Nah, we need to hope that some of these patents contain "prior art" relevant to today's software patents. Where's my time machine when I need it?

      Just my $.02,
      Ron

      --
      Impeach Barack Obama for violating the Constitutional requirement to be a "natural born" citizen to hold the office of P
    19. Re:Burned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      may i speak for everyone else when I say

      WTF?

    20. Re:Burned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Moron. These are AMERICAN patents. No European patents were burned, and anyway with no reciprocal arrangement (like the one that still doesn't exist today) it's fucking irrelevant.

      Perhaps you're confusing this with the whole Edison / Hollywood deal?

      I wish someone would patent moronic conspiracy theories then we'd all be spared.

      By the way, Henry Ford didn't make a motor car until at least 50 years after this happened. Now what's the lifetime of a patent? Do I hear 25 years?

    21. Re:Burned by PantsWearer · · Score: 1
      You might want to do some research.

      Ford never stated he invented the automobile. The patent that the grandparent was referring to was owned by George Selden for the "Road Engine". In retrospect, it was a patent that was broadly applied to all internal combustion automobiles. The patent was administered by an automobile company consortium called the Association of Licensed Automotive Manufacturers.

      Ford refused to pay the royalties necessary and the patent was in court for years. In the end, Ford won because they limited the scope of the patent to a particular kind of engine that no manufacturers actually used at the time. From the reading I've done, it was more to allow Ford to keep manufacturing without all of his customers being sued than anything else.

      There's more info Here

      --
      Be glad life is unfair, otherwise we'd deserve all this.
    22. Re:Burned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a common misconception. Devils belong in Hell, Demons come from The Abyss. Now, depending on your belief set, a Demon or a Devil killed on Earth, or in the same plane of existance as Earth (yes, we torture those alien lifeforms as well) is forced to return to their respective suffering for a period of time.

      Its not as bad for us as it is for you puny humans, we're accostomed to it. Not exactly 'frolicing' tho... that's for damn sure.

      Hope this was enlightening for you.

  4. Hmmm. Is that the solution? by FFFish · · Score: 5, Funny

    Perhaps the solution to this madness of patenting algorithms, genes, etcetera... is to burn down the patent office again!

    --

    --
    Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
  5. Prior Art? by forsetti · · Score: 3, Funny

    Gee -- maybe they'll find prior art to cover all of SCO's claims???

    --
    10b||~10b -- aah, what a question!
  6. Just what we need. by Kickasso · · Score: 2, Funny

    More patents. Sheesh.

  7. What by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    No backups? Amateurs!

    1. Re:What by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There would've been one, were it not that p#666, "method and apparatus for duplicating data as to produce a similar, re-reproducible copy in case the original work has been destroyed" was filed before someone got the bright idea to put the whole bunch of paperwork under the xerox and fax it to their OCR-enabled Relational database L2-cached multitasking RAID-system.

    2. Re:What by soimless · · Score: 1

      it dosent matter now thoughs pattents are competly useless becuse these things are certainly in the publicly domain. unless the next sonny bono like act extends the copy right allmost 400 years... the way congress has been voteing on things it might happen.

  8. Ironically by Megaweapon · · Score: 5, Funny

    one of the patents burned in the fire was the first internal sprinkler system...

    --
    I'm sure "SlashdotMedia" will improve on all the wonders that Dice Holdings blessed us all with
    1. Re:Ironically by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Ironically, British troops had attacked Washington DC 24 years earlier, burning nearly everything except those patents, which they very carefully avoided.

    2. Re:Ironically by dhalgren99 · · Score: 1

      Why? Why did they avoid the patents office?

    3. Re:Ironically by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bibliotheca Alexandrina?

    4. Re:Ironically by Fascist+Christ · · Score: 4, Funny

      FTA: "... all its records were lost when a fire gutted the building where the patents were being stored temporarily while a more modern, fireproof headquarters was under construction. There was a fire station right next door ..."

      --
      TodayTM BillyJoelTM GoogleTMd for StitchTMes due to WindowsTM while RollerbladeTMing with an AppleTM and a PopsicleTM
    5. Re:Ironically by afidel · · Score: 4, Funny

      It was a long term goal of slowing the US by encouraging us to embroil ourselves in silly patent litigation. It was dreamed up by the great, great, great, great, etc grandfather of Harry Seldon.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    6. Re:Ironically by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It was a long term goal of slowing the US by encouraging us to embroil ourselves in silly patent litigation.

      We'll teach them! Now they have to follow our system!

    7. Re:Ironically by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck the article? Gross!

  9. But what about the missing Dr.Who? by Fallen+Andy · · Score: 2, Funny

    much more interesting if they found the missing episodes...

    1. Re:But what about the missing Dr.Who? by Fred+Or+Alive · · Score: 1

      It's a conspiracy - there are no missing episodes of Doctor Who. The 'missing' ones are held by the secret cartel... I've said too much... no, there here... not the ... no! mercy... knickers... arghh * CARRIER DROPPED *

      --
      10 PRINT "LOOK AROUND YOU ";
      20 GOTO 10
    2. Re:But what about the missing Dr.Who? by shannara256 · · Score: 1
      I've said too much... no, [they're] here... not the ... no! mercy... knickers... arghh * CARRIER DROPPED *

      Why would he type "arghh"? Wouldn't he just say it? Maybe he was dictating...

  10. X-reposts by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 5, Funny

    In other news, the first recorded original story on slashdot has been found.

    It has been carbon dated to within the mid 1830's.

    It has been duped 4796 times since then.

    I actually like these kind of outlandish irrelivent stories, must be a slow news day... :)

    --
    liqbase :: faster than paper
    1. Re:X-reposts by Jahf · · Score: 1

      I actually like these kind of outlandish irrelivent stories, must be a slow news day... :)

      Oh man, then you need this!

      --
      It is more productive to voice thoughtful opinions (reply) than to judge (moderate) others.
    2. Re:X-reposts by a10t2 · · Score: 1

      The half-life of carbon-14 is about 5700 years, so dating using it only becomes accurate after about 500 years.

    3. Re:X-reposts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It has been duped 4796 times since then.

      No no no no no. You're confusing it with the Evil Bit story.

    4. Re:X-reposts by Codifex+Maximus · · Score: 1

      Whatever happened to MEEPT?

      --
      Codifex Maximus ~ In search of... a shorter sig.
  11. Why just some? by Louis+Savain · · Score: 2, Funny

    Maybe some of the new tech patents will 'accidently' get burned.. we can only hope

    Yes, but why just some? Why not all of them? That would solve all of our patent problems, don't you think?

    1. Re:Why just some? by eclectus · · Score: 1

      no, because then MS's team of laywers will go out and patent everything that they couldn't patent before because someone else got to it first.....

      --
      This signature is a waste of 42 characters
    2. Re:Why just some? by Louis+Savain · · Score: 2, Funny

      no, because then MS's team of laywers will go out and patent everything that they couldn't patent before because someone else got to it first.....

      I see your excellent point. In that case, we need to burn, not only the patents, but all the patent laws too. Where are those kept? :-)

    3. Re:Why just some? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      In that case, we need to burn, not only the patents, but all the patent laws too.

      Why not the patent lawyers as well?

    4. Re:Why just some? by SpaceLifeForm · · Score: 1
      I can imagine MS may claim that they filed some of those X-patents so they can control the GUI desktop.
      Ok, maybe that would be the SCO lawyers.

      All your desktop are belong to us.

      --
      You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
    5. Re:Why just some? by torpor · · Score: 1

      how do you know she's a patent lawyer?

      --
      ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
    6. Re:Why just some? by Oliver+Wendell+Jones · · Score: 1

      Part of your response must have been cut off on my screen, I'm sure you meant to say "but all the patent law(yers) too."...

      --
      A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing -- Emo Phillips
    7. Re:Why just some? by 9-bits.tk · · Score: 1

      Why not burn all the Evil Anti-*nix companies' patents, then get the goodies (i.e. RedHat, Novell, etc.) to register all the Anti'Nix's patents for themselves. Then patent the idea of writing a program. Etc. Etc. Etc.

  12. Re:Hmmm. Is that the solution? by rokzy · · Score: 4, Funny

    maybe it'd be another Reichstag fire though? with MS, Disney et al. shouting "this is a communist conspiracy against intellectual property. We must demand all products be DRM'd"

    shortly followed by CompilerNacht - the night of the broken compilers.

  13. Newly discovered patents from 1790 by 1gor · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...included patent on a business method of "using silly patents for intimidation and extortion".

    There should be consequences...

    --
    --
    1. Re:Newly discovered patents from 1790 by Psyrg · · Score: 1

      That Sir, is so cunning you could pin a tail on it and call it a weasel.

      Anyone want to lend me a few bucks to patent the submarine patent? It appears that prior art is easily swept under the rug these days. :)

  14. Re:If it happened today ... by solive1 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Perhaps correct spelling would be one of the possibilities?

  15. 1826 the first engine ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting
    According to http://inventors.about.com/library/weekly/aacarsga sa.htm

    The very first self-powered road vehicles were powered by steam engines and by that definition Nicolas Joseph Cugnot of France built the first automobile in 1769 - recognized by the British Royal Automobile Club and the Automobile Club de France as being the first. So why do so many history books say that the automobile was invented by either Gottlieb Daimler or Karl Benz? It is because both Daimler and Benz invented highly successful and practical gasoline-powered vehicles that ushered in the age of modern automobiles. Daimler and Benz invented cars that looked and worked like the cars we use today. However, it is unfair to say that either man invented "the" automobile.

    [...]

    1824 - English engineer, Samuel Brown adapted an old Newcomen steam engine to burn gas, and he used it to briefly power a vehicle up Shooter's Hill in London.
    1. Re:1826 the first engine ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Actually, according to Wikipedia :
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_combustio n_e ngine

      Francois Issac de Rivaz built the first internal combustion engine in 1807. However his engine was impractical for many uses because it lacked power and relied upon a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen for fuel.

      In 1858, Jean Lenoir invented the first practical internal combustion engine. It relied upon coal gas that was sucked into the cylinder at the beginning of each stroke and then ignited to push the piston to the other end of the cylinder. This process was then repeated at the other end of the cylinder making the engine double-acting.

      In 1867, Nikolaus Otto built the first four-stroke internal combustion engine. This engine proved more efficient than Lenoir's design and was successfully marketed for industrial purposes. The design was later improved by Gottlieb Daimler who focused on making the technology practical for use in automobiles most notably by incorporating a gasoline carburettor. In 1890, Wilhelm Maybach built the first four-cylinder internal-combustion engine. Both Maybach and Daimler were originally employees of Otto's company but left in 1882 to form their own company.

      Over the same time period the two-stroke internal combustion engine was being perfected. In 1867, Sir Dougald Clerk invented the first two-stroke internal combustion engine. The design was later simplified by Joseph Day in 1891.


      So it seems to be earlier than 1826 : 1807 for the Frenchman and 1824 for the Briton.
    2. Re:1826 the first engine ? by SEE · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not first engine, first internal combustion engine. Steam engines -- even ones running on gas -- are external combustion engines. The technologies are quite distinct.

    3. Re:1826 the first engine ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The patent was for an "first internal combustion engine". Automobiles were not mentioned - so a 1769 steam powered (external combustion) automobile has exactly nothing at all to do with a patent for an internal combustion engine.

      A gasoline powered engine might be interesting but the quote doesn't make it clear if it worked like a steam engine of the time (external combustion) or more like modern IC gasoline engines. (googling reveals that it was an IC engine, though some sources say the 1823 patent version was coal fired and the 1826 patent was a gasoline one.) Not that I know what fuel this American patent used, either...

      Neither is the first IC engine though- there was what amounts to a single charge engine fired by gunpowder in 1673, which probably shouldn't count as it only worked for a single cycle, but it did establish the explosion driving a piston in a cylinder motif. The first patent for an IC engine was a kerosene one by Robert Street in 1794. (Barber had an patent in 1791 which involved an explosion driving a jet of gas into a fan-like-apparatus to turn a turbine, but it didn't have pistons so wasn't a precursor to modern engines.)

    4. Re:1826 the first engine ? by Cheeko · · Score: 2, Informative

      For specifics on the internal, external, and who actually created both. The obligatory Wiki link.

    5. Re:1826 the first engine ? by Animats · · Score: 3, Informative
      Cugnot's was steam-powered. Didn't work very well, either.

      The Age of Steam didn't really get going until Watt. Newcomen steam engines had been around for almost a century before Watt, but the approach was terrible. In a Newcomen engine, the cylinder was heated and cooled on every cycle. This is horrendously inefficient, but nobody knew that then. It took a huge engine to produce very modest power outputs. (Typical specs: 60-inch cylinder, 15HP) Watt built a Newcomen engine and started making measurements of the properties of steam and the heat capacity of the materials in the engine. Once he had some numbers to work with, he realized that a much simpler cycle would work much better.

      Then the problem was making an engine that didn't lose all the pressure through leaks. It took until 1782 before Boulton and Watt built something that could rotate a shaft. By 1788, they finally had a good engine.

      They also had a patent extension from 1775 to 1800, given them directly by Parlament. Boulton and Watt used this to become a big company. That's how the Industrial Revolution started.

      Visit the Kensington Science Museum in London, and you'll see many of the earliest steam engines.

    6. Re:1826 the first engine ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Daimler and Benz invented cars that looked and worked like the cars we use today

      you are so fuull of shit you stink.

      NOTHING they invented is anything like what we have today. the fact it has pistons and valves does not equal the same thing... and then you need to look at the rotary-wankle engine that makes piston engines look insanely stupid.

      They invented something that was slightly like engines today and run on a very loose principal that today's have.

      the same? not a chance in hell.

  16. Of course! by iamdrscience · · Score: 5, Funny

    All this time looking for a solution to the problems with the U.S. patent office and the solution was right in front of my face the whole time. Arson! How could I have missed that one?

    1. Re:Of course! by rokzy · · Score: 4, Funny

      or in other words "I recommend fire. And lots of it."

    2. Re:Of course! by Taladar · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Napalm. Lots and lots of Napalm"
      "Why don't you just nuke 'em while you are at it"
      "What about Nukes, General?"

    3. Re:Of course! by PMuse · · Score: 1

      I invented fire.

      Also, the internet. And the wheel.

      --
      "We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
  17. Patent Office Arson... by Ianoo · · Score: 4, Funny

    The original fire was no doubt caused by early open-source advocates protesting against Babbage's patents on the Difference Engine!

    With that in mind, if some of you OSS fellows fancy meeting me Arlington, Virginia for a re-enactment of this great event, be sure to bring matches, gasoline and plenty of firelighters.

    1. Re:Patent Office Arson... by afidel · · Score: 1

      Would those be firefighter in the sense of Farenheight 451? Because those are the only firefighters I would advocate for the Patent Office.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    2. Re:Patent Office Arson... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would those be firefighter in the sense of Farenheight 451? Because those are the only firefighters I would advocate for the Patent Office.

      Not to be too nitpicky, but I think in Farenheight 451 "firefighters" were never mentioned, only "firemen".

    3. Re:Patent Office Arson... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure the patent office is in Alexandria VA not Arlington.....so you might have some trouble there.

    4. Re:Patent Office Arson... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
      With that in mind, if some of you OSS fellows fancy meeting me Arlington, Virginia for a re-enactment of this great event, be sure to bring matches, gasoline and plenty of firelighters.

      Be our guest.

      Just FYI, actual patent documents are stored temporarily in Carlyle and permanently in that huge underground cave thingy in West Virginia. The only thing that exists on paper at the USPTO are the last few (thousand) applications that entered the system before we went 100% electronic image format.

      But let me guess... Electronic image format is yet another sign that the USPTO is trying to ruin your great innovations?

    5. Re:Patent Office Arson... by tibbetts · · Score: 1

      Or in Alexandria, where the new headquarters were recently completed.

      --
      :wq
    6. Re:Patent Office Arson... by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

      Alexandria? Quite an appropriate location for such an important facility...

  18. Just waiting to hear Darl by not_a_product_id · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm sure SCO will say that they have some smoking gun patent in there registered by Darl's great great great grandfather

    --

    ---
    We spoke for about a half an hour. I don't recall a thing we said. - Colorblind James Experience

    1. Re:Just waiting to hear Darl by evilviper · · Score: 1

      Perhaps a patented system for getting money from penguins?

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  19. X-patents? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The truth is out there. And it's already been patented.

    1. Re:X-patents? by MisanthropicProgram · · Score: 1
      I think that's the "Y" patents. 18-25 year-olds are a bit young for the "X" patents.

      So, what are your suggestions for patents to the "Metrosexual" inventors? Or the Homosexual and Women inventors?

      The PTO Office.

    2. Re:X-patents? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Research says that patents with "X" in the name get more licensees.

    3. Re:X-patents? by SIGPrez · · Score: 1

      Yes, they found the long forgotten patent #1:

      A method for controlling electronic circuit boards through the use of memorized sequences of coded instructions that act upon dynamically stored data.

    4. Re:X-patents? by rfrenzob · · Score: 1

      Isn't "X" patented somewhere by x.org?

  20. Re:Hmmm. Is that the solution? by heby · · Score: 2, Funny

    i guess they didn't have off-site backups back then...

  21. What is the distribution pattern by nebaz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If 10,000 patents were all that were issued from 1790 to 1836 (40 years) and considering we are up to patent number 7,000,000 (approx) right now, it would be interesting to have a graph of patents granted over time from 1790 to the present. My guess is that it would be an exponential curve.

    --
    Rhymes that keep their secrets will unfold behind the clouds.There upon the rainbow is the answer to a neverending story
    1. Re:What is the distribution pattern by tehcyder · · Score: 2, Funny
      Yeah well, even without drawing it, I can guarantee you it's not a straight line.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    2. Re:What is the distribution pattern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suspect that short of buffalo and Indians, the distribution patterns of most things would be exponential.

    3. Re:What is the distribution pattern by incast · · Score: 1

      my guess is that if you were able to plot some index that showed technological progress over the years, it would have a similar exponential trend too..

    4. Re:What is the distribution pattern by the+pickle · · Score: 1

      That all depends on your frame of reference ;)

      p

    5. Re:What is the distribution pattern by nebaz · · Score: 4, Informative

      Doing a little research I have indexed "round number" patents and gotten the following results.

      Patent 10000 was issued in 1853 , 50000 was issued in 1865, 100000 was issued in 1870, 200000 was issued in 1878, 500000 was issued in 1893, 1000000 was issued in 1911, 2000000 was issued in 1935

      Patent 3000000 was issued in 1955, 4000000 was issued in 1976, 5000000 was issued in 1991, 6000000 was issued in 1999, 6500000 was issued in 2002,

      --
      Rhymes that keep their secrets will unfold behind the clouds.There upon the rainbow is the answer to a neverending story
    6. Re:What is the distribution pattern by servognome · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This is from a quick search I did by patent number:
      1 - Traction Wheels - July 13, 1836
      10 - Cutting Dye Wood - Aug 10, 1836
      101 - Sails and Rigging - Dec 6, 1836
      1,000 - Carriage Spring - Nov 3, 1838
      10,000 - Paddle Wheel - Sep 6, 1853
      100,000 - Horse Sun Bonnet - Feb 22, 1870
      250,000 - Ditching Machine - Nov 22, 1881
      500,000 - Combined Plush Tank & Manhole - Jun 20, 1893
      1,000,000 - Vehicle Tire - Aug 8, 1911
      1,500,000 - Submersible vessle for navigation under ice - Sept 10, 1920
      2,000,000 - Vehicle Wheel Construction - May 12, 1932
      2,500,000 - Interlock for Quick Fastening Doors - Dec 6, 1946
      3,000,000 - Automatic Reading System - May 6, 1955
      4,000,000 - Process for Recycling Asphalt-aggregate compositions - Dec 28, 1976
      5,000,000 - Ethanol production by Escherichia coli strains co-expressing Zymomonas PDC and ADH genes - Mar 19, 1991
      6,000,000 - Extendible method and apparatus for synchronizing multiple files on two different computer systems - Dec 7, 1999
      6,750,000 - Electron device manufacturing method, a pattern forming method, and a photomask used for those methods - Jun 15, 2004
      Approximate time between patents:
      #1-10,000: 17 years
      #10,000-100,000: 17 years
      #100,000-500,000: 23 years
      #500,000-1,000,000: 18 years
      #1,000,000-2,000,000: 21 years
      #2,000,000-3,000,000: 23 years
      #3,000,000-4,000,000: 21 years
      #4,000,000-5,000,000: 15 years
      #5,000,000-6,000,000: 8 years
      #6,000,000-6,750,000: 5 years

      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
    7. Re:What is the distribution pattern by servognome · · Score: 1

      Doh! mod down -1, for too slow looking up info and submitting post

      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
    8. Re:What is the distribution pattern by bugnuts · · Score: 4, Funny

      An early inventor probably sent out something like

      "Hello, my name is Benjamin Franklin and I am an inventor. I used to have no patents and no respect as a scientist, but today I have over 500 patents including the Franklin Stove and the Electric Kite! Follow these instructions exactly and in 200 years, you'll have nearly 6 MILLION patents in your name!

      1: Copy this letter 10 times and add your name to the top as a co-inventor
      2: Make a unique modification to the invention at the bottom
      3: Submit that to the patent office and send this letter to 10 friends

      In 200 years we will have over 6,000,000 patents!"


      The government obviously had to stop this somehow, and make it look like an accident.

    9. Re:What is the distribution pattern by printman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I did some quick charting against US population and the year; the peak time (so far) for new patents was from 1999 to 2002 with 166,667 per year (FWIW, we are almost there in 2004)

      The rate of population increase since 1900 has averaged about 1.37% per year. Patents have increased at more than double that rate at 2.73% per year.

      Furthermore, the population growth appears to be slowing while the patent growth is speeding up.

      I would guess that this is the result of a lot more businesses getting patents for trivial inventions (or getting separate patents for different parts of their inventions) as well as the dominance of larger businesses which can afford to have full-time patent filing departments - i.e. patents are one more "product" that a company produces.

      --
      I print, therefore I am.
    10. Re:What is the distribution pattern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      1 - Traction Wheels - July 13, 1836
      10,000 - Paddle Wheel - Sep 6, 1853
      1,000,000 - Vehicle Tire - Aug 8, 1911
      2,000,000 - Vehicle Wheel Construction - May 12, 1932
      Talk about reinventing the wheel.
    11. Re:What is the distribution pattern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would appear the length of the patent title is related to the patent number...

    12. Re:What is the distribution pattern by Destoo · · Score: 1

      Actually, yours is easier to read and visualize.

      I give you +1 aestethic

      --
      Nouvelles de jeux et technologies en français. TC
    13. Re:What is the distribution pattern by thisissilly · · Score: 1

      For what it's worth, Franklin was offered a patent on his stove and turned it down.

    14. Re:What is the distribution pattern by back_pages · · Score: 2, Informative
      Just FYI, the first two digits of a patent number are known as "series". They are mostly, but not strictly sequential.

      For example, there are patents in the "09" and "10" series, but I don't believe there are any "08" series. I could be wrong about that, but I've never seen an "08" series in my technology.

      Also, it should be observed that there weren't any television patents before 1940, there weren't any cable tv patents before 1950, and there weren't any flat panel tv patents before 1990. There are simply a lot more different technologies to patent these days.

    15. Re:What is the distribution pattern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Patent #2: One-click shopping.

    16. Re:What is the distribution pattern by Shadowlore · · Score: 1

      Combined Plush Tank & Manhole

      Ok just WTH is that supposed to be?

      --
      My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
    17. Re:What is the distribution pattern by Thalia · · Score: 1

      You're talking about the Serial Number, which is assigned to a patent when it is first filed. This is different from the Patent Number, which is assigned to a patent when it is issued.

      Both serial numbers and patent numbers are assigned sequentially. There is an 08 series, of serial numbers, that series was filed between January of 1993 and December 1997.

    18. Re:What is the distribution pattern by evilviper · · Score: 1
      Furthermore, the population growth appears to be slowing while the patent growth is speeding up.

      I would guess that this is the result of a lot more businesses getting patents for trivial inventions

      Really? I would guess this is the result of a lot more birth-control inventions getting patents... :-)
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    19. Re:What is the distribution pattern by bluesnowmonkey · · Score: 1

      Interesting how many times someone has literally reinvented the wheel.

    20. Re:What is the distribution pattern by WhiteDragon · · Score: 1
      500,000 - Combined Plush Tank & Manhole - Jun 20, 1893
      <blink>... OK, that's a very interesting title... I have this great vision of a big plush toy (like one that you win at a carnival) in the shape of a Tank, stuffed down into an opening in the street leading down to the sewers.
      --
      Did you mount a military-grade, variable-focus MASER on an unlicensed artificial intelligence?
  22. Worthless info. by bs_02_06_02 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Why all the hoopla? Aren't they expired?

    Also, the fact that everyone forgot about them 160+ years ago only means that they are even less worthwhile today.
    Unless some desperate soul is anxious to hunker down for a fun Friday night of reading burnt, forgotten, and expired patents. ??

    --
    -- No sig for you!
    1. Re:Worthless info. by kunudo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Historical value? Just because you can't find any use for them doesn't mean they're not valuable to some random historian researching early industry or something...

    2. Re:Worthless info. by Martin+Blank · · Score: 4, Informative

      Historical reference. There are patents today which refer to older patents, which refer to still older patents, etc. Sometimes it's interesting to trace the developments of current ideas from their initial inspirations.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    3. Re:Worthless info. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why all the hoopla? Aren't they expired?

      Maybe because you don't want a second patent issued for the same thing.

    4. Re:Worthless info. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Why all the hoopla? Aren't they expired?

      Methinks you forget the entire *point* of a patent system.

      The patent system exists so that inventors have an incentive to disclose their inventions to the public. This is so that others can use the invention once the patent expires, and the idea doesn't just sit in some forgotten vault.

      The value of a patent to the country as a whole lies not in the time that the patent is valid, but after it expires, when it is freely availible to all for use.

    5. Re:Worthless info. by mikael · · Score: 4, Interesting

      After watching "Connections" on the Discovery channel, I always thought it would be cool if you could graph the references between research papers and also do the same for patents.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    6. Re:Worthless info. by tin+foil+hat+dude · · Score: 1

      I love the fact that they don't have an historian at the PTO, and really don't seem to care too much about all this historical folderol.

      Maybe if they did have someone to keep the history, and actually carred a little about how what they were doing could have a significant impact on society as a whole, a lot of the abuses in the past few years could have been avoided.

      best patent ever:6293874 User-Operated Amusement Apparatus for Kicking the Users Buttocks

      --
      Reality is all that stuff that doesn't care if you believe in it or not.--Solomon Short
    7. Re:Worthless info. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why all the hoopla? Aren't they expired?

      It turns out that Jefferson patented "single click shopping" in 1801.

    8. Re:Worthless info. by lgordon · · Score: 1

      >Why all the hoopla? Aren't they expired?

      Yeah, they'd only still be valid if they were copyrights .

    9. Re:Worthless info. by Allnighterking · · Score: 1

      Why all the hoopla? Aren't they expired?


      Nope... now that the DMCA is in force along with the Sonny Bono Patents to Infinity clause that Disney paid him for, The aren't.. GM, Ford, Dailmer-Chrysler and other automakers are now ammassing Legal Armies, as the families and decendants of the patent holder on the internal combustion engine are claiming that their royalties have been unpaid for over 100 years.

      Last heard the legal armies where seen invading the luggage district in NYC. Sales of briefcases on the Black Market have been heard going as high as 15,000 dollars US for black leather briefcases with monograms. Cheap Gucci Knock-offs from China are spurring a new round of litigation that is believed will further increase the demand for breifcases.

      Microsoft has rolled out there latest in a line of ever increasing patents to add to the fray. Certain officials at M$ have been heard mumbling that they have patents on using stylus shaped dipensors of permanent material onto pressed and shaped tree pulp (Writing on paper) Claims from the SCO are that they are the owners by default of the Internal Combustion Engine intelectual property (They bought a car last year and the rights on the patents where transfered with the car) and that they intend to sue everyone as their patent even includes Bidpedal locomotion by an Organic entity (walking).

      Sentors Hatch and Boxer Say that this only goes to prove that the INDUCE act is needed and that by adding even more clauses eventually things will be come so choked that total lawsuit parity can be reached.

      On the home front Bush claimed Victory in the war against the economy, by citing the increased need for lawyers in the US. --We need more high paying jobs like this and I'm just the one to create the environment to give it to us.-- He was quoted as saying.

      Dick Cheney was at an undisclosed location.
      --

      I'm sorry, I'm to tired to be witty at the moment so this message will have to do.

    10. Re:Worthless info. by Thalia · · Score: 1

      You can.

      For patents, go to the PTO site (www.uspto.gov), find a patent you like. See the listing of patents that were cited by the patent you found. Click on the patent number, they are all hyperlinked to the patent itself. You can chain back all the way.

      For research papers, go to citeseer.com. Type in the title of the paper you want. Follow instructions.

      Isn't it great when people actually implement those great ideas you have?

    11. Re:Worthless info. by mikael · · Score: 1

      Yes, but I was thinking of a visual diagram, like this one

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
  23. Re:New from the USPTO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    just like a normal patent but with more cash?

    <rimshot>

  24. Temporay storage site? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess the storage site was accurately named, if not spelled.

  25. Well, well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Coincidence? I think not.

    Anyway, for those who are thinking "could it happen today?"... Yes, and no.

    Yes, in the sense that you can blast all magnetic media to hell or at least disrupt it with a suitable EM pulse.

    No, in the sense that all important information is likely in an EM protected vault (hah! too expensive) and backed up to optical disks (hah! weakest link in the chain is the poorly paid worker).

    So...

  26. X-patents? by iamdrscience · · Score: 5, Funny

    X-patents, eh? Sounds like the patent office is trying to jazz up their image to attract more young patent holders. Makes sense though, I heard they haven't been doing so well marketing to 18-25 year olds.

  27. Re:New from the USPTO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's more XTREME!

  28. So THAT explains it! by johnny_sas · · Score: 1
    The fact that some early patents were lost explains the fact that they now frantically rubber-stamp everything, maybe to try to cover up the lost of the patents, maybe to eliviate their guilt?

    1. Re:So THAT explains it! by Solder+Fumes · · Score: 1

      johnny_sas:
      eliviate

      Yoda:
      Do or do not; there is no try. If spelling of a word you know not, knowledge of this you must gain before writing it.

  29. I don't get it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What do these patents have to do with the X Prize?

    P.S. NOBODY READS THE FUCKING NEW YORK TIMES!

    1. Re:I don't get it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      P.S. NOBODY READS THE FUCKING NEW YORK TIMES!

      Which, of course, explains why they are the largest newspaper in circulation, right?

    2. Re:I don't get it? by jimand · · Score: 1

      Nobody goes there anymore; it's too crowded.

      Yogi Berra

    3. Re:I don't get it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      peple need paper for there bird cages?

    4. Re:I don't get it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      $N million for the first private company that launches the patent office into low earth orbit?

      Hell, we engineers would probably start a national holiday of the event.

  30. Working models of patent inventions by StefanJ · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There was once a requirement that patent applications be accompanied by a working model of the invention.

    The patent office once stored thousands of these little gadgets.

    When the requirement was lifted, the patent office cleared out the warehouse, and gave way the models.

    As you can imagine, most were probably trashed . . . given to kids who destroyed them. The surviving specimens are hot collector's prizes.

    I once visited a collector's house, while doing "Dead Media" research. He had a few models. Most were of really pedestrian things, like automated brick makers.

    STefan

    1. Re:Working models of patent inventions by Rick.C · · Score: 1
      When I was about 13 I visited the basement workshop of the man who patented the machine that makes corrugated cardboard. He had the working miniature patent model there gathering dust. It was about a foot square.

      Needless to say, it was awesome!

      --
      You were 80% angel, 10% demon. The rest was hard to explain. - Over The Rhine
      "Math in a song is good."-Linford
    2. Re:Working models of patent inventions by 6502_C64 · · Score: 0

      If they decide to bring back the working model requirement, I'm going to corner the toy submarine market. After all, those business patents holder will need to include in a working copy of their business model...

    3. Re:Working models of patent inventions by kansas1051 · · Score: 1
      There was once a requirement that patent applications be accompanied by a working model of the invention

      Actually, that's not true. Written description has been considered an appropriate form of enablement since the first patent regulations were created. There was discussion in 1796 about adding the requirement to some of the first statutes, but it was ultimatley turned down because it would have been nearly impossible for inventors outside of New York or DC to file for patents due to obvious transportation concerns.

      In certain situations (i.e. a claim to a perpetual motion machine) the patent office can reuqire evidence, such as an example of the inveniton.

  31. US Patent Number 1 by drphil · · Score: 5, Funny

    Of course the first US patent is the one for the time machine -- or at least it will be when it gets invented. (Insert shameless plug for Cheapass games here)

    1. Re:US Patent Number 1 by corngrower · · Score: 1, Funny

      Yes, but it will refer to other patents that will be issued later as prior art.

    2. Re:US Patent Number 1 by xleeko · · Score: 2, Funny
      Of course the first US patent is the one for the time machine -- or at least it will be when it gets invented. (Insert shameless plug for Cheapass games here)
      And the inventor will be Doctor Lucky, if someone doesn't kill him first :-)
    3. Re:US Patent Number 1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too bad it got burnt up in the fire.

  32. X-patent? by iamdrscience · · Score: 2, Funny

    Sounds like something ESPN's marketing team would make up to say that Tony Hawk has on the 900 or Rodney Mullen has on the Dark Slide.

  33. Re:Hmmm. Is that the solution? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny
    maybe it'd be another Reichstag fire though? with MS, Disney et al. shouting "this is a communist conspiracy against intellectual property. We must demand all products be DRM'd"
    You mean they were supposed to wait for a fire?
  34. What's that sound? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's the sound of a million IP lawyers having an orgasm in unison.

    - Seth

  35. Patent Number One by StefanJ · · Score: 1

    Cheapass Games has created a game about the struggle to file the first U.S. Patent.

    Stefan

    1. Re:Patent Number One by Rick.C · · Score: 1
      Does the winner get to claim "FP!!!"?

      "First Patent", that is.

      --
      You were 80% angel, 10% demon. The rest was hard to explain. - Over The Rhine
      "Math in a song is good."-Linford
  36. How insightful by siskbc · · Score: 5, Interesting
    If 10,000 patents were all that were issued from 1790 to 1836 (40 years) and considering we are up to patent number 7,000,000 (approx) right now, it would be interesting to have a graph of patents granted over time from 1790 to the present. My guess is that it would be an exponential curve.

    Of course it would. The population has grown exponentially, as has effectively every other non-ratio metric associated with our country. GDP has gone up exponentially, food consumption has gone up exponentially, the stock market...you get the idea.

    A much more insightful study would be patents/person by year. I would imagine that this figure has also gone up, though likely not quite with an exponential dependence. Most interesting would be sharp jumps in this curve that one might associate with specific events, like WWII, certain presidents getting elected, new USPTO directors, and so on.

    --

    -Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat

    1. Re:How insightful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the stock market

      Except during The Panic of 1870(?) and The Great Depression of 1929. I say (?) because I'm not entirely certain of the date.

    2. Re:How insightful by siskbc · · Score: 1
      Except during The Panic of 1870(?) and The Great Depression of 1929. I say (?) because I'm not entirely certain of the date.

      Quite right, among other times (early 70s, the 90's bomb and the current doldroms). But because the timeline is so long and we have such a large amount of data, these end up correcting themselves and being blips. Over teh long haul, an exponential fits very well.

      In math terms, fitting an exponential to stock data results in a better goodness of fit than any other model.

      --

      -Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat

    3. Re:How insightful by Saeger · · Score: 4, Interesting
      In fact, it's been observed that just about any evolutionary process you care to name will advance exponentially. This is known as The Law of Accelerating Returns (which is more general than the more familliar "Moore's Law" that people like to apply to everything except what it was intended for (transistors)).

      WARNING: The Singularity Is Closer Than It Appears

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    4. Re:How insightful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Singularity Is Closer Than It Appears

      Ironic, really, how so many of the people who ridicule others' gods also believe that we are doomed to create our own.

      (Note that I'm not speaking about the parent in particular, I know nothing about his/her record on religious tolerance - it's just that the mention of the Singularity reminded me of how intolerant Slashdot as a whole is to traditional religion, while posters in general are happy to embrace equally religious ideas from the world of technology.)

    5. Re:How insightful by Saeger · · Score: 1
      1st: I'm agnostic, and I don't begrudge anyone their choice of religious social-club as long as it doesn't affect me (as in: "die heathen/infidel/witch!"). The one aspect of religion I live by -- which is also the kernel of most non-hypocritical religions -- is The Golden Rule.

      2nd: 'Singulartarianism' isn't a religion, as such. It's just an inevitability as long as the current rate of tech acceleration continues as it has for billions of years. I may be a proponent, but there's no blind faith or fables here. Still, detractors of the idea like to call it the "Rapture of the Nerds".

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    6. Re:How insightful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WARNING: The Singularity Is Closer Than It Appears

      I've always had a pet peve with the 'singularity' theory. It assumes that the law of accelerating returns contintues until a system crashes to zero from resource saturation. Unfortunately, like Moore's law and other 'laws' in pop science, they are just observations.

      An important and overlooked observation about evolutionary systems is that they follow the accelerating returns curve until they saturate the use of the available resources. By then the law of diminishing returns is dominating the population.

      There is no crash. There is no sigularity. The population will adjust itself, even if that means through attrition. Once new resources or more effiecient methods of utilization are brought into play, the acceleration will continute.

      -----------
      Fear ye all who have everything they want, for no growth - only conservation - can be expected of them. As surely as the Sun rises they will stamp out any change - including yours - for better or different.

    7. Re:How insightful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The singularity assumes the exact opposite: That a system will continue to accelerate until the acceleration causes a total breakdown of society as we know it because the acceleration in development exceeds our capabilities of comprehension.

      No crash, a disintegration where we go from being in control (as a species) to being entirely side tracked by technological development continuing outside our control.

    8. Re:How insightful by ErikZ · · Score: 1

      "WARNING: The Singularity Is Closer Than It Appears "

      I don't see it. How close does that make it?

      --
      Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
  37. Francois Issac de Rivaz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Francois Issac de Rivaz built the first internal combustion engine in 1807.

  38. 10,000 X Patents! by Odonian · · Score: 1, Funny

    Never realized how much our founding fathers were into Pr0n..

  39. ah yes... by SQLz · · Score: 4, Funny
    ....including one from 1826 for the first internal combustion engine..

    Ah yes,thats the patent I based my "internal cubustion engine, ON THE INTERNET" patent. Big bucks I tell you.

    1. Re:ah yes... by Idarubicin · · Score: 1
      Ah yes,thats the patent I based my "internal cubustion engine, ON THE INTERNET" patent. Big bucks I tell you.

      You mean my Ethernet card is supposed to smoke like that?

      --
      ~Idarubicin
  40. meaningless by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

    This doesn't matter. These patents would have expired a very long time ago.

    Had this been copyright, it's a different story. Realistically, copyrights never expire anymore (thanks to Disney + Sonny Bono and our "Big Business First" congressional philosophy).

    --
    A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    1. Re:meaningless by SEE · · Score: 1

      Nah, all copyrights from 1922 or earlier are expired in the U.S., and even in the retroactive life-plus-seventy EU anything issued as far back as 1836 will have almost certainly run out by now, since the author would have had to live 98 years after the publication.

    2. Re:meaningless by Thuktun · · Score: 1

      These are only as meaningless as any other historical documents...

    3. Re:meaningless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The expired copyrights you mention expired prior to the last extension. It appears that every time more copyrights are in danger of expiring, minions of Disney in congress will act to extend them again. Effectively no more works will enter the public domain unless explicitly put there by the owners of the copyrights, that is what the original poster meant to say.

  41. Re:Hmmm. Is that the solution? by miskatonic+alumnus · · Score: 2, Funny

    That should be revised to read "terrorist conspiracy". Get with the times, man!

  42. Pay up! by Stonent1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    My great-great-great-grandfather patented Hyperlinking, Rambus memory, and Unix back in the 1800's. I'll be setting up a paypal account shortly so you can pay.

    1. Re:Pay up! by Matrix_X · · Score: 1

      It's ok, My Great-Great-Great-Great Grandfather patented Paypal type accounting, so you can just foward that to my account.

      THANKS!

    2. Re:Pay up! by damien_kane · · Score: 1

      Along that logic, my great-great-great-great-great grandfater patented patents.
      To all you USians: All your banks are belong to me.

      Thank you, have a nice day...

  43. Return of working model requirement?! by 192939495969798999 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I hope this helps to usher in the return of the working model requirement. As patents used to require a working model in order to be awarded, it surely would've been easier to figure out whose patent was which when the inventor actually had to have a working one! So long to all those hi-tech patents where the company merely drafted a requirements document and fired it off to the USPTO. Let's see you build one first! 10-20 million lines of code later, the hi-tech patent volume slides down a few more notches.

    --
    stuff |
    1. Re:Return of working model requirement?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i think the model requirement was dropped because it artificially kept poor inventors out in the cold. Only an inventor who had money could perform the experiments necessary and build the device, especially since it was new and therefore much more expensive. I wouldnt be surprised if it was dropped during a time of economic downturn when a lot of innovative minds were out of work (eg, the 1930s).

    2. Re:Return of working model requirement?! by sprior · · Score: 1

      Does that mean that business process patents would have to be profitable before they were patentable?

    3. Re:Return of working model requirement?! by Bushcat · · Score: 2, Interesting
      The National Maritime Museum (http://www.nmm.ac.uk/) in the UK has world's largest collection of original drawings, consisting of some 1 million plans dating from the early 18th Century. With a couple of other resources, it's possible to track British shipbuilding continuously from 1688. Since it's a public collection, if you can name the ship they're obliged to provide a copy of the plans (but not for free).

      But the designs for the first 16 ships of the modern fleet didn't exist as drawn plans at all, rather they were models. It was a case of "one like this, please, but 25 times larger."

      Even when it drawn plans became the norm, the Navy Board would require a model: from http://www.nmm.ac.uk/site/request/setTemplate:sing lecontent/contentTypeA/conWebDoc/contentId/14112/v iewPage/2, "You are to prepare and send with your Draught a Solid or Model shaped exactly by the same with the Load Water Line, the height of the Decks and Wales, the Channels, Chainplates, Ports, Gallerys etc marked thereon; And that everything proper to explain your Design be done both on the Draught and Solid in as particular manner as possible for our consideration and directions therin before you proceed on your Building or Rebuilding.

      Letter from the Navy Board to the Master Shipwrights at the Royal Dockyards, 1716."

      So using models for patent applications is a very reasonable concept when describing a three-dimensional entity.

    4. Re:Return of working model requirement?! by angle_slam · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The requirement of a working model may have been doable in the days of mainly mechanical inventions. But these days, a lot of inventions are electrical. A large processor such as an Athlon 64 probably has dozens have patents. Should they be required to submit an Athlon 64? How will the PTO test it? What if the invention is on a method of making a processor. Can't really model that, can you? Not to mention drug patents, or software patents.

  44. also... by sootman · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Until this spring, that is, when two lawyers... a clue"

    OMG they... a clue? Great!

    That reminds me, this morning, I... my breakfast.

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    1. Re:also... by laigle · · Score: 1

      How does one ... a clue? Give it a few drinks and take it to a movie?

    2. Re:also... by sehryan · · Score: 1

      Is this similar to "...Profit!"?

      --
      The world moves for love. It kneels before it in awe.
    3. Re:also... by AyeRoxor! · · Score: 1

      Until this spring, that is, when two lawyers...a clue to several important patents from the 1790's - including one from 1826 for the first internal combustion engine..."

      No no no. You're reading it all wrong.

      This spring, two lawyers, who were a clue to several important patents, including one from 1826 for the first internal combustion engine, ...

      So, it's actually the engine which ...

    4. Re:also... by ericvids · · Score: 1
      That reminds me, this morning, I... my breakfast.
      I have no idea what you're talking about ... profit! /me gets outta here
      --
      Pet peeve: Profane people propagating perfunctory pedantry.
    5. Re:also... by Shadowlore · · Score: 1

      "That reminds me, this morning, I... my breakfast. "

      You sick ...

      --
      My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
  45. Expired by now by harpoon · · Score: 1

    Does it matter at this point? Wont all of these patents have expired already? AFAIK all patents have the same lifespan.

    I can see how they would be interesting from an academic/research point of view, but not much else.

  46. 10000 Patents. by fozzmeister · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They were issued from July 1790, when the United States patent system was created under an order signed by George Washington, to July 1836

    10000 Patents in 43 years, That is a lot lower than the amount of patents issued nowadays. Perhaps the patent officers should take a cue from the old (dead) guys and be waaaaaaaay more stingy with patents that are granted. My bet is because they can't keep up with the amount of patents they pass more patents, so companies file for more patents.

    1. Re:10000 Patents. by oroshana · · Score: 1

      Actually it's because the patent examiners get more points for granting then they get for refusing patents. And there is a biweekly quota of points. Since each patent takes a lot of up-front research, refusing a patent also has the effect of preventing you from examining more patents to get points with. As a result patent examiners work on up to 10 patents in parallel. This ends up confusing many examiners who end up allowing patents thru because of their workload. It's a great system. PS: Maybe we should federally fund the patent system instead of having there be a fee for applications and maintainance of patent? Just a thought.

    2. Re:10000 Patents. by shawnce · · Score: 1

      You do realize the large difference between the US population in the late 18th and early 19th centuries and that of today (start of the 21st century). Also a huge difference exists between the economy of today and then.

      Those all play into the a large increase of patents granted in the last 100 years or so.

    3. Re:10000 Patents. by Hulfs · · Score: 1
      10000 Patents in 43 years, That is a lot lower than the amount of patents issued nowadays. Perhaps the patent officers should take a cue from the old (dead) guys and be waaaaaaaay more stingy with patents that are granted.

      Or perhaps there were a whole lot less patents applied for and granted because society was largely agrian (farmers). Also, considering the total population of the states in 1830 was figured at around 13 million (including slaves) there were a whole lot less people available to file patents. Compare that to the current estimated US population of 293,957,807.

    4. Re:10000 Patents. by caluml · · Score: 2, Funny

      I hereby patent a device for taking 1790 from 1836 and ending up with 43.

    5. Re:10000 Patents. by Rick.C · · Score: 1
      That is a lot lower than the amount of patents issued nowadays.

      Nowadays you don't have to bundle up your patent and the working model and ride your horse all the way to Washington D.C. to file your patent application.

      You know, making that a requirement might not be a Bad Thing. There sure would be a lot of horse... er, "pollution" in Washington D.C.

      Not that there isn't a lot of bull pollution there already.

      --
      You were 80% angel, 10% demon. The rest was hard to explain. - Over The Rhine
      "Math in a song is good."-Linford
    6. Re:10000 Patents. by fozzmeister · · Score: 1

      Bah ok very funny, so my quick maths sucked big style, but your a pedantic idiot. You'll probably find a spelling mistake there too, asshole.

  47. Patent Office Spokesperson by teamhasnoi · · Score: 5, Funny
    Ms. Quinn describes him as the inventor "who arguably discovered the first internal combustion engine." You'd think that someone who is the spokeperson for the Patent Office would know the difference between discovered and invented. Or maybe not.

    Perhaps I'm wrong - maybe the internal combustion engine *was* discovered.

    "Where did you say you heard those noises?"
    "Just up here, around this bend in the cave"
    "Wait! I hear it! What sort of infernal creature is it?"
    "God save us, I think it is coming this way!"
    "Hold the lantern higher and brace yourselves!"
    .....
    "Aww, it's just a baby! It's no danger to anyone!"
    "Let us call it 'Infernal Combustion Engine'."
    "We did find it in this cave, how about 'Internal Combustion Engine'?"
    "Brilliant!"
    "This discovery will bring peace and prosperity to all the peoples of the world!"

    (cue evil Doom3 music)...

    1. Re:Patent Office Spokesperson by syrinx · · Score: 1

      dammit... This is why I shouldn't read Slashdot at work while eating lunch -- I almost spit out my lunch onto my work computer.

      +10, Funny to you.

      --
      Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
    2. Re:Patent Office Spokesperson by The+Ego · · Score: 1

      You'd think that someone who is the spokeperson for the Patent Office would know the difference between discovered and invented.

      The latin word for 'invent' (invenio IIRC) means both what the layman calls 'invent' and 'discover'. And those semantics are still present in English (and many roman languages).

      You'll also find that in many cases 'invent' and 'discover' are used interchangeably, if not by the public at large, at least in law (IIRC ship wrecks are said to be 'invented' by the explorer who found them).

      So my guess is that this spokesperson used perfectly adequate terms, but his speech may be too cultivated for this audience.

    3. Re:Patent Office Spokesperson by teamhasnoi · · Score: 1
      To Discover, Invent. We discover what existed before, but remained unknown; we invent by forming combinations which are either entirely new, or which attain their end by means unknown before. Columbus discovered America; Newton discovered the law of gravitation; Whitney invented the cotton gin; Galileo invented the telescope.

      Discover and Invent Although they are synonyms (according to the site), there is a subtle difference.

      But what do I know? I just post stupid things to Slashdot.

    4. Re:Patent Office Spokesperson by Shadowlore · · Score: 1

      "You'd think that someone who is the spokeperson for the Patent Office would know the difference between discovered and invented."

      as humorous as that comment is, it can (and has) be convincingly argued that there is no difference. The principles which underlie very "invention" exist prior to their "discovery" by an "inventor".

      All an inventor does is to discover these principles. Indeed, this is one of the fundamental flaws of the modern concept of "intellectual property". The fact that on many, many occasions two people in different parts of the world w/no knowledge of the other (and thus their work) have come with the same thing (in many cases even exact duplicate implementations), is a testament to that.

      As such the idea that any of us "create" something we call "intellectual property" and then have a moral right to prevent others who do that from benefiting from hard work is patently absurd (hehe).

      It is one thing to copy another's work. But the idea that two people independently discover principles of the universe and whomever gets to the government office first gets to bar the other from reaping their rewards is quite another.

      --
      My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
  48. Words mean things by jimhill · · Score: 1

    The article (more accurately, the patent agency spokeswoman quoted therein) makes the same semantic mistake that many do...the 1826 patent went to the man who INVENTED the internal combustion engine, not the man who DISCOVERED it. Invention and discovery are not synonymous and only semiliterate slobs use the words interchangeably.

    Thank you; that is all.

    --
    Learn to spell: nickel, missile, lose, solely, amendment, speech, kernel, probably, ridiculous, deity, hierarchy, versus
  49. so only 10,000 patents in the first 46 years by TheLastUser · · Score: 1

    And now the US office processes over 300,000 applications per year. Its cool, how much smarter we are now.

    1. Re:so only 10,000 patents in the first 46 years by BlacKat · · Score: 1

      Or how much stupider we are...

      Depends on which way you look at it I guess. ;)

    2. Re:so only 10,000 patents in the first 46 years by YugtheC · · Score: 0

      Stupider. Difinitely
      I would say that that vast number (>300,000 p.a.)is probably responsible for the large quantity of crap "As seen on TV" adds. They let through yet another knife patent and we have suddenly got another Ginsu 2000 clone promo.

      I sure do need another pair of suglasses (only 3 easy payments of $89.95 NZD) with interchangable lenses that will be replaced free of charge should I decided to jump on them.

      I just wonder who holds the copy-right on "...but wait, there's more!"

  50. Wrong category by vuvewux · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Xbox news should be posted to games.slashdot.org

    --

    Let's not forget that one can hate his government, but love his country.
  51. First Patents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Patent Number X-1: Potash Patent Number 1: Locomotive with good traction (1836) Link

    1. Re:First Patents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Patent Number X-1: Potash (1790)
      Patent Number 1: Locomotive with good traction (1836)

      Link

  52. Because... by paragon_au · · Score: 1

    "Why? Why did they avoid the patents office?"

    The patent office had a patent on it.

  53. Patent #10001 by jimand · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...rubber fire hoses

  54. I'm sorry, but you owe me money by haplo21112 · · Score: 1

    My great great great grandfather patented patenting in patent No 1 it was recently recovered...so for each patent issued since I'm due a licencing fee...

    --
    Power Corrupts,Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely, leaving one person(group)in charge is absolutely corrupt.
  55. Don't you mean the ones that were "destroyed"? by FirstNoel · · Score: 1


    I thought they were gone forever...

    --
    "Hmm. I am to metaphor cheese as metaphor cheese is to transitive verb crackers!"
  56. Re:If it happened today ... by ChrisMaple · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Many major city libraries - for instance, Los Angeles - have complete patent collections on microfilm. There are also internet-accessible records in numerous places. Practically speaking, it can't happen today.

    --
    Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  57. Re:If it happened today ... by wan-fu · · Score: 1

    If the editors can't even get it right (c'mon editors! dupes I can understand, but spellchecking is just an aspell away), how do you expect Slashdotters to spell properly.

  58. Two lawyers! Oh no... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let 'em sue me, I'm keeping my indoor toilet

  59. SCO? by duffbeer703 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Does SCO own any of this intellectual property?

    --
    Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
  60. Another win for Darl by Angst+Badger · · Score: 2, Funny

    including one from 1826 for the first internal combustion engine...

    Well, of course-- that would be the original SCO internal combustion engine, the principles of which have been stolen by every car on the planet!

    --
    Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
  61. Re:I'm sorry, but that patent has expired [NT] by mark-t · · Score: 1

    NT

  62. Re:How insightful (compare it to...) by gosand · · Score: 1
    A much more insightful study would be patents/person by year.

    And a comparison to patents/company by year. I think that would show the real trend of patents.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  63. Re:Hmmm. Is that the solution? by 0x0d0a · · Score: 4, Informative

    Uh, the Nazis *did* bill the Reichstag Fire as a terrorist conspiracy, and a reason for extended police powers, and a reason for the nation to need to "stand together" and not criticize them.

    There should be a term that refers to events like the Reichstag Fire and 9/11.

  64. Two words: Prior Art.. by the_rajah · · Score: 1

    Prevention of dupes. Plus the obvious fact that one of the objects of the patent paradigm is that the "art" becomes available to the public upon expiration. Now if we could just get that no dupes part to apply to /.

    "Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain

    --


    "Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
  65. Fun by siskbc · · Score: 1
    And a comparison to patents/company by year. I think that would show the real trend of patents.

    I agree, but I think you can do better than a simple ratio, as I'd want to eliminate non-patenting companies (like farms), and patents not assigned to companies. - I'd look at:

    the fraction of companies that pantented *anything* in a given year vs. time.

    the fraction of patents assigned to companies (as opposed to individual inventors) vs. time

    patents per employee at patenting companies vs. time

    patents/yr vs. inflation-adjusted revenue/yr for each company in the fortune 500, and for all of the fortune 500 companies. Will show if the top companies are receiving more patents given their productivity

    contested vs. assigned patents, by year of assignment. I'd love to see that!

    I'd be surprised if someone hasn't looked into these things - if not, someone should.

    --

    -Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat

    1. Re:Fun by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 1

      Your sig mentions that you are looking for a posting as an "multivariate data analyst", perhaps you would be the person to at least investigate the data :)

      Assuming you have some spare time (looking for employement because between jobs for instance) it might be something that could lead you into a whole new area of expertise, and possibly open up new avenues for yourself.

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
    2. Re:Fun by siskbc · · Score: 1
      Your sig mentions that you are looking for a posting as an "multivariate data analyst", perhaps you would be the person to at least investigate the data :)

      Ha! I would if I could get someone to hire me for it; the uncreative bastards require something called an "MBA" or an "Economics degree" for some reason.

      Assuming you have some spare time (looking for employement because between jobs for instance) it might be something that could lead you into a whole new area of expertise, and possibly open up new avenues for yourself.

      You ever get a company, gimme a call. ;) Seriously, I'd willingly do it, but HR departments don't typically do more than a keyword match on resumes, and as I'm a chemist...;P I'm in grad school finishing the ol' Ph.D. right now. I'm looking in finance, but I'm having a hard time finding people who will give out-of-field math geeks a chance.

      --

      -Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat

  66. Provocation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is a word for it: provocation.

    1. Re:Provocation by Da+Penguin · · Score: 2, Interesting
      There is a word for it: provocation.

      Except for the fact that (as many believe) the Nazis started the fire to strengthen their position.

    2. Re:Provocation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except for the fact that (as many believe) the Nazis started the fire to strengthen their position.

      IOW, not much of a difference between that and 9/11.

    3. Re:Provocation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just as many believe the US Government had some hand in 9/11. They couldn't have gotten 90% of the laws passed removeing more and more of our fredoms since without 9/11 takeing place.

    4. Re:Provocation by CaptainAvatar · · Score: 1

      Many may believe that, but historians don't seem to. Eg, Richard Evans' recent "The Coming of the Third Reich" definitely didn't; I'm 95% sure Ian Kershaw's Hitler biography also didn't. Van der Lubbe, the Communist who was executed by the Nazis for starting the fire, was definitely involved. But it is possible he was manipulated into doing so by Nazis, though frankly I doubt they would have gone to such ends - they could have just set the fire themselves and blamed anyone they wanted to for it.

      --
      The real Captain Avatar is a fictional character, so I suppose he doesn't mind if I impersonate him.
  67. ... == ?? (or 'the meaning of ellipses') by sczimme · · Score: 1


    "Until this spring, that is, when two lawyers... a clue"

    OMG they... a clue? Great!

    That reminds me, this morning, I... my breakfast.


    What does ... mean in this context, and are the ...s equivalent? Do they mean

    Found?
    Ate?
    Poured milk on?
    Lost?
    Fried?

    Or does it mean something naughty? If that's the case I don't want to hear about what the lawyers did to the clue, or for that matter what you did to your breakfast. Eww.

    --
    I want to drag this out as long as possible. Bring me my protractor.
  68. Is Plato a slob? by michaelmalak · · Score: 1
    1. Re:Is Plato a slob? by jimhill · · Score: 1

      Plato was absolutely a slob. Didn't you see the way he poured mustard all over himself at the toga party?

      Wait.

      Never mind.

      --
      Learn to spell: nickel, missile, lose, solely, amendment, speech, kernel, probably, ridiculous, deity, hierarchy, versus
    2. Re:Is Plato a slob? by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      Plato was an imperfect realization of the slob ideal.

  69. Oh, no - tell me you really didn't reall do THAT! by CharonX · · Score: 1

    you ... your breakfast.?

    Tell me you didn't do that. I mean, ok, we are here on ./, most of us are geeks and pretty desperate, but there are limits, k .

    Try getting a dog (or perhaps a pig - whatever you prefer). I heared that can help (ok, it might still not be great, but better than ... your breakfast)
    Or best of all - get a girlfriend - that should prevent the entire situation.



    So again - please don't throw away your breakfast, just cuz it looks suspicious, either feed it to your pets or get a girlfriend who will make sure that you'll use the milk etc. before it reaches the best-until date.

    (PS: Anybody who thought about something else here - shame on you :p)

    --
    +++ MELON MELON MELON +++ Out of Cheese Error +++ redo from start +++
  70. How about a working prototype by Moderation+abuser · · Score: 1

    Rather than a model. Any inventor will have at least one and probably several working prototypes anyway, if you don't have one you're not exactly an inventor. No need for the patent office to hold the prototype, it's up to the inventor to maintain it while the patent is in effect.

    --
    Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
    1. Re:How about a working prototype by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      If it's really a hardship, you could always give them a year leeway. Give them a patent, but require they demonstrate a working model within the year or it's void.

      Or, heck, it doesn't have to be a model, it could be a factory floor or something. Anything that actually did what the patent said. If you haven't built any implimentation of it in a year, tough.

      And this would stop people from patenting things that are currently impossible, and I don't see that as a problem. The point of patents isn't to reward people who can predict future inventions before others, it's to encourage people to reveal actually existing inventions.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  71. Oh Shit Yeah by Rie+Beam · · Score: 1

    Finally, we can finally recover those lost plans to the Pig De-Greaser and the Rake Sharpener. Society is saved yet again by our forefathers.

  72. Re:I AM A DOSA EATING SMELLY SOUTH INDIAN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...and that mod took it hook, line and s(t)inker. HAHA, you a winnar!

  73. Museum by Fuzzums · · Score: 1

    Put them in a meseum.

    Right next to the patent system itself.

    They both are SO last millennium...

    --
    Privacy is terrorism.
  74. Re:Hmmm. Is that the solution? by fiftyvolts · · Score: 1

    What's the official word on Goodwin's Law in regards to a /. post?

  75. Are you kidding? by halivar · · Score: 1

    Darl is just salivating at the opportunity to buy out whoever patented the internal combustion engine.

    Next year at SCOForum, they'll announce their name change to that of the patent holder (Inc., of course) with the new tag-line, "Powering your cars for almost 200 years."

    Then the lawsuits begin. First up? Well, Autozone and Daimler-Chrysler, of course!

  76. Wild Wild West by Just+Jeff · · Score: 1

    I wonder how many of these patents were used in the old TV show "Wild Wild West?"

  77. greaaat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just what we need revenge of the patent lawyers...from the grave.

  78. Re:Hmmm. Is that the solution? by rokzy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    (hopefully) that discussions should not be reduced to a set of childish rules.

  79. Re:Hmmm. Is that the solution? by thephotoman · · Score: 1

    As a certified attorney in Godwin's Law, I can say that the comparison is germane and letigitimate. The events were similar in effect.

    However, if the comparison were gratitous, then Godwin's Law would need to be enforced.

    --
    Haec merda tauri est. Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
  80. Re:Hmmm. Is that the solution? by fuzzix · · Score: 1
    However, if the comparison were gratitous, then Godwin's Law would need to be enforced.

    *sigh*

    Godwin's Law is not meant to be invoked. It's merely an observation: "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."

    I believe it should be seen like Moore's law - merely the result of the observation of a trend, but not set in stone and impossible to enforce in any meaningful manner.
  81. OMG FP LOLZ by Al+Dimond · · Score: 0, Troll

    The first patent probably reads something like:

    Frist Patent
    ------------
    i got teh frist patnet. i w00t lolz.

    [insert gnaa troll here]

    1. Re:OMG FP LOLZ by The+Cookie+Monster · · Score: 1

      Everyone knows that the first patent filed was for a time machine

      Apparently it wasn't even the first time machine. Typical US Patent Office morons.

      Pity the details burned in the fire.

  82. New X-Patent Series by Skrekkur · · Score: 1

    I can smell a new X-Files spinoff called The X-Patents where Sculder and Mully investigate long lost patents and find the evil people breaking them :D

  83. Back then you had submit a working model. by Graemee · · Score: 1

    One of the requirements of early patents was to produce a working model of the patented item. These models were often made of wood, and contributed to the fire when the office burnt.

    If you want to better patents, make people supply a working model. I'm quite sure alot of patents would not be granted or would be shown to to prior art.

    1. Re:Back then you had submit a working model. by back_pages · · Score: 1
      If you want to better patents, make people supply a working model. I'm quite sure alot of patents would not be granted or would be shown to to prior art.

      True, but the USPTO takes in about 350,000 applications per year and runs the largest federal mail room, second only to (drumroll please) the US Postal System.

      It's just impractical, but it would have its advantages. A lot of time is spent examining "magic" inventions and dealing with the lawyers for said magic inventions. The examiners don't want to deal with them, but the lawyers demand every last detail examined else the application will end up in appeals.

      So if you have office space for 350,000 models of various size per year, let the USPTO know.

    2. Re:Back then you had submit a working model. by Allnighterking · · Score: 1

      A working model.... hmmmm that would really bring software patents to a screaching halt now wouldn't it?

      --

      I'm sorry, I'm to tired to be witty at the moment so this message will have to do.

  84. What? by Tom7 · · Score: 1

    ... several important patents from the 1790's - including one from 1826 ...

    Uh, 1826 is not in the 1790s.

    1. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The date is in base 36. Back then, using base 10 dates was still under patent, and it didn't seem worthwhile to get a license.

  85. WTTM by MarcoPon · · Score: 1
    I hope they'll find that patent for a WTTM (Wooden Time Travel Machine) that I had filed yesterday, 8 August 1830!

    Bye!

    --

    SeqBox
  86. #5,989,178: Immortality Device by Hao+Wu · · Score: 3, Funny

    Magnetic Ring, Chiu 5,989,178

    November 23, 1999

    A magnetic ring adapted to be worn on the little finger of the hand. The magnetic ring includes a ring and a pair of permanent magnets that extend from the ring. When the magnetic ring is worn on the little finger of the right hand, the pair of permanent magnets are oriented on the top and bottom, respectively, of the little finger, with the South pole of the magnet that is oriented on the top of the little finger generally contacting the top of the little finger, with the North pole of the magnet that is oriented on the top of the little finger in opposition thereto, with the North pole of the magnet that is oriented on the bottom of the little finger generally contacting the bottom of the little finger, and with the South pole of the magnet that is oriented on the bottom of the little finger in opposition thereto. When the magnetic ring is worn on the little finger of the left hand, the position of the polarities of the pair of permanent magnets are reversed from that of the right hand. The magnetic ring can also be made to fit around all the fingers of the hand and all the toes of the foot.

    --
    I suggest you read Slashdot
  87. Offtopic, But great by AveBelial · · Score: 0

    Just so you can read the article found a handy mozilla extension http://extensions.roachfiend.com/ third one down called bug me not, signs you into annoying sites that require registration with a large database of usernames....

    Enough advertising now... Bye bye karma

  88. so there were... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...those x files
    the truth about patents is out there somewhere.

  89. Re:Hmmm. Is that the solution? by thephotoman · · Score: 1

    Quite true. However, one cannot deny the collary about ending the discussion that has since been appended to Godwin's.

    I belive that the collary was the point that the great-grandparent post was refering to. It usually gets lumped in to Godwin's, even though not really a part of the law. As for enforcement of the collary, it's really up to those that control the thread. However, my interpreteation is that the thread should stand.

    --
    Haec merda tauri est. Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
  90. So that's what happed to my ancestor's patent for by wsanders · · Score: 3, Funny

    "fetting down wordf and ideaf in corporeal form"!

    Y'all owe me one feptillion dollarf...

    --
    Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
  91. Imagine my surprise by stuffduff · · Score: 0
    Imagine my surprise to discover amoung the 10,000 these X patents:

    ActiveX, DirectX and of course the Xbox.

    <rimshot>

    --
    "Can there be a Klein bottle that is an efficient and effective beer pitcher?"
  92. Re:Oh, no - tell me you really didn't reall do THA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    get a girlfriend who will make sure that you'll use the milk etc. before it reaches the best-until date

    That doesn't quite work.

    Last month, my wife (former GF) decided that she'd be extra nice to me, and started making me breakfast (porridge). Last week, I was very sick when I got to work, and I couldn't understand why (you can see where this is going, right?).. the dog woke me up early on Friday morning, and I decided to start making my own.. I poured the milk into the bowl, and was greeted with an awful stench.. the milk had expired last saturday.

  93. Fascinating Old Patents by midnightthunder · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The original requirement for a patent model allowed for a maximum volume of one cubic foot, measured on all faces as the limit in model size. I am sure that originally, that seemed reasonable enough. Still, it became quite evident as the Patent Office was busy turning into a massive filing system of 12 inch by 12 inch by 12 inch models that this was a nightmare in progress, reminiscent of the final scene in Raiders of the Lost Arc wherein an item is carted off into an endless warehouse. The models themselves vary from small individual components to astonishing miniaturized versions of large machinery to full size examples of individual products. The materials vary from wood, to machined metals to amazing works done in tin. Around 1890, the cubic foot rule had become unworkable and the models were no longer accepted. After allowing the Smithsonian to pick and choose from among the models, the remainder were scrapped. From among these, a small fraction have survived and reside in museums and collections. Some of these are sufficiently interesting as to serve as the centerpieces of collections. While the models themselves may be more of museum pieces, than educational, which could be debated either way, the documentation of the evolution of patents and how they build one each upon the others that have cut the path before them is of historical and technical interest.

  94. Re:Hmmm. Is that the solution? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Politico-criminals would never do that today. They send anthrax now.

    Hmmm... When was the "Patriot Act" passed? When was the anthrax sent?

  95. Re: off-site backups by bizard · · Score: 1

    They did, they had just been patented:

    Patent #9999: System and Method for preserving data in case of catastrophe...

    Of course, the company who filed it was charging too much for the PTO to pay and they decided to wait until the patent expired to implement it.

  96. patent stats by citroidSD · · Score: 1

    shameless plug for my lab. Here is a link to a poster (pdf - warning large file) that disccusses some of the growth statistics of patents and patent classes.

  97. Re:Hmmm. Is that the solution? by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
    maybe it'd be another Reichstag fire though?

    No, unfortunately, the patent office was not housed in the WTC...

  98. Supremes won't let the next © extension slide by tepples · · Score: 2, Informative

    It appears that every time more copyrights are in danger of expiring, minions of Disney in congress will act to extend them again.

    It also appears that in Eldred v. Ashcroft, the Supreme Court let the copyright term extensions of 1976 and 1998 slide but hinted strongly that it would overturn a third successive extension.

  99. Congress is the one taxing the USPTO by tepples · · Score: 1

    Maybe we should federally fund the patent system instead of having there be a fee for applications and maintainance of patent?

    The problem here is that the Congress has laid what amounts to a tax on patent filing fees, with the proceeds going to the general use of the federal government. If the Congress stopped taxing these, the USPTO could probably hire the examiners it needs to do a just job on each patent.

  100. Re:Hmmm. Is that the solution? by elegie · · Score: 1

    The LPF has mentioned a cartoon about the U.S. Patent Office. The cartoon shows a military aircraft carrying a black monolith (as in 2001: A Space Odyssey) towards the USPTO building. The "sorely needed" delivery is being done by "two geeks."

  101. What? by slapout · · Score: 1

    "only about 2,800 have been recovered....Until this spring, that is, when two lawyers...a clue to several important patents from the 1790's - including one from 1826 for the first internal combustion engine..."
    What? You didn't finish the thought. That quote doesn't make sense!

    --
    Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
  102. OT Re:What is the distribution pattern by Mostly+a+lurker · · Score: 1

    Often wondered: could snapping one's fingers to attract the attention of a shop assistant be considered prior art to the one-click shopping patent?

  103. OSRM should be busy... by EqualSlash · · Score: 1

    finding out how many of those x-patents are infringed by Linux.

    1. Re:OSRM should be busy... by DarkKnightRadick · · Score: 1

      Who is OSRM?

      --
      "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
  104. Did they find the patent for... by syousef · · Score: 1

    ...the flux capacitor? Doc's gonna be mad if they haven't!

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  105. Re:Hmmm. Is that the solution? by Codifex+Maximus · · Score: 1

    > However, my interpreteation is that the thread
    > should stand.

    Nazi! :)

    --
    Codifex Maximus ~ In search of... a shorter sig.
  106. 1826! by sita · · Score: 1

    The mention of one for the internal combustion engine makes me wonder...didn't Henry T Ford stick his middle finger up at patents?

    Only the patent must have expired some 70+ years before the T-Ford.

  107. Re:Hmmm. Is that the solution? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm always very annoyed by comparisons of anything with the Nazis. As there is *nothing* that can be compared with it. I'm from Germany and I'm very afraid that soon those comparisons that try to cover the responsibility of the Germans will be normal. Well: "No historical backspin!"

    Anyways, the Nazis burned the Reichstag themselfs and most of the photos of it where faked. So no comparison here anyway.