Slashdot Mirror


McDonalds Files To Patent Making a Sandwich

I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "McDonalds has applied for patent WO2006068865, which carries the title 'METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR MAKING A SANDWICH.' John Montagu, the fourth Earl of Sandwich, can eat his heart out (unless that's been patented, too). Undoubtedly, some people are contemplating whether there's anything novel in this patent that is somehow obscured by its generic title. Feel free to examine their flowchart for yourself and see exactly how novel their sandwich 'subroutines' are. The good news is that, given that it only mentions generic sandwich making 'tool(s),' rather than any specific machine, it might not survive after the In Re Bilski decision, which was meant to put a stop to absurdities such as this. But until McDonalds's application is rejected or invalidated, make sure you don't use their flowchart when making sandwiches. After all, if you 'apply appropriate condiments to appropriate compartment,' you might infringe upon their IP."

10 of 346 comments (clear)

  1. Trollish article description is trolling by Janthkin · · Score: 5, Informative

    The flowchart is irrelevant; the question is what do the CLAIMS say. Here, the claims are directed to bringing separate refrigerated sandwich makings up to temperature in very short order. Take a look, for example, at claim 1:

    A method of filling an order for a sandwich comprising: toasting a bread component for the sandwich for less than about 1 minute in response to the order in a first heating device; and initiating and completing the heating of a sandwich filling for the sandwich from about 4OF or less to about 120F or more in a second heating device, while the bread component is heating, in response to the order.

    Now, I CAN do that with my toaster & my microwave. But we don't need to resort to hyperbole to do that, do we?

    Moreover, this is a PCT application, based on US application 11/018,989. The US application has been abandoned, for failure to respond to the most basic of office actions.

    And seriously, is this news-worthy? If /. wants to publish EVERY bad patent application, it's going to get crowded here pretty quick. There's a lot of chaff out there.

    1. Re:Trollish article description is trolling by Throtex · · Score: 3, Informative

      You do realize you can file whatever you want with the PTO and, as long as it meets basic filing requirements and you send them your money, it will publish, right?

      You do also realize that the mere publication has no legal effect unless the application subsequently issues as a patent, right?

  2. Re:Prior Art by LilBlackKittie · · Score: 5, Informative

    ...and this patent was filed three years ago and published two years ago. Oh wait, the article in the Guardian was published two years ago too. Did I accidentally get so bored as to click "yesterday" over seven hundred times... or is it a slow news day? :-)

  3. Re:Method by jcorno · · Score: 5, Informative

    Methods are statutory subject matter, which means they're patentable in principle, as long as they result in a physical change. They don't even necessarily have to involve a tool at all. Those claims are perfectly valid (though maybe not patentable due to prior art). Business methods aren't necessarily patentable, because they're generally mental processes. The difference seems to be confusing a lot of people.

  4. Re:Note to non-Americans by icensnow · · Score: 3, Informative

    Americans refer "burgers" as "sandwiches".. reserving the word "burger" to refer to just the patty.

    Speaking as a life-long American, no, we don't. America has dialect regions and I've only lived in three, but I've never thought of things this way.

  5. It's a sandwich making gadget, not a process by Ritchie70 · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you do enough clicking, you will find that there is, in fact, a "gadget" involved here. It's some sort of hinged sandwich assembly tray. This is not just a business process patent.

    A year or two ago, McDonald's was testing out deli sandwiches in select restaurants. Based on the patent, this is probably something they came up with for that, not for their mainstream burger business.

    --
    The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
  6. With a side of broken links... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The broken link was meant to go here. I have no idea why Slashdot changed it from the original you can find in my submission. Perhaps they intended to link to a past Slashdot story? Oh well.

    - I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property

    1. Re:With a side of broken links... by Repossessed · · Score: 4, Informative

      How does Bilski not apply here? The sandwich making process they list in their claims is not tied to a particular device, but is implemented by human hands. I have not admittedly, read the whole decision, but the 'must be tied to a particular device' part seems pretty straightforward.

      --
      Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite (TM)
  7. Re:Drive Through user patents coffee burning metho by Toonol · · Score: 4, Informative

    "People complain about scalding hot coffee at specific restaurant. Restaurant has policy that states coffee temperature. Coffee is continually over this temperature. People again complain about scaling coffee. Again, investigation reports coffee outside norms. Restaurant says it'll fix it. Person gets nether regions burned by coffee, sues and wins due to the afformentioned problems. Get the facts right."

    --excerpt from Rorschach's Journal, 1985

  8. Re:Drive Through user patents coffee burning metho by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 4, Informative

    You do know that it is impossible to get third degree burns from boiling coffee. Once the coffee leaves the dispenser it is now in a state of cooling off from ~212F. The worst you could burn yourself is second degree. A third degree burn tends to require an active flame or strong acid, neither of which are available in a cup of McDonalds coffee.

    The government says you're full of crap:

    It takes 2 seconds for a child to receive third degree burns from water at 150 degrees. It takes 5 seconds if the water is at 140 degrees, and 30 seconds at 130 degrees.

    Apparently, people who know more about this than you do think it's possible to get a 3rd degree burn from boiling water.

    --
    Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?