Apple Patents a Paper Bag (theguardian.com)

I claim prior art by WillAffleckUW · 2016-09-20 13:18 · Score: 2

In fact, the paper bag was invented by a woman to serve baked goods in, at least the white one Apple describes. The brown paper bag was invented by another woman, too.

--
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --

Re: I claim prior art by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-20 13:30 · Score: 5, Informative

While the thought of a patent on a paper bag seems silly, if you actually read the patent there is a lot more to it than just patenting what you think of as a paper bag, it's a complete redesign of how a bag is made. While this does not mean the patent should be approved, it's certainly wouldn't impact normal paper bags.
Re: I claim prior art by macs4all · 2016-09-20 14:48 · Score: 2

While the thought of a patent on a paper bag seems silly, if you actually read the patent there is a lot more to it than just patenting what you think of as a paper bag, it's a complete redesign of how a bag is made. While this does not mean the patent should be approved, it's certainly wouldn't impact normal paper bags.
And not only that; just take a look the next time you go to a chain-restaurant. Cups? Patented. Cup Lid? Patented. Sandwich container? Definitely Patented. Condiment Packets? Patented. And, oh yes: Bag? You guessed it; Patented.

And yet none of those are worthy of the attention of Slashdot. Why?

Because Clickbait.
Re:I claim prior art by mspohr · 2016-09-20 16:04 · Score: 2, Interesting

ACs like you would be harder to track but in this case the submitter used his user name so it's not difficult for anyone with half a brain to figure it out.
The submitter would happen to be me. I posted this "garbage" to illustrate just how far Apple has fallen in terms of innovation and leadership. It seems the only thing they can do these days is protect and extend their walled garden. "Courage" means screwing customers. Innovation means thinking up dodgy ways to avoid paying taxes. Their product line is old and tired and falling badly behind everyone else.
Sad, but very relevant for anyone who cares about tech.

--
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
Re:I claim prior art by Swave+An+deBwoner · 2016-09-20 16:28 · Score: 1

That AC wasn't saying that you posted "this garbage".

Look more carefully -- he was referring to the AC's post that began with the word "Bestiality".
Re:I claim prior art by Dunbal · 2016-09-20 16:43 · Score: 1

Invented by the Chinese thousands of years ago, to serve chicken. In a paper bag. Number 63 on the menu right there.

--
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Re:I claim prior art by SuricouRaven · 2016-09-20 18:55 · Score: 1

There is no penalty for filing a patent that doesn't get approved, so the usual practice in tech is to patent everything an employee doodles on a napkin. It costs next to nothing, and you might get lucky. Even a junk patent is potentially useful as a club to threaten to sue a competitor over, and so fodder for cross-licensing agreements.
Re:I claim prior art by arglebargle_xiv · 2016-09-20 20:14 · Score: 1

In fact, the paper bag was invented by a woman to serve baked goods in, at least the white one Apple describes
Specifically, she was selling baked Apples, buy Apple was too baked at the time to realise it.
Re:I claim prior art by jandersen · 2016-09-20 21:07 · Score: 1

It's not a paper bag, you fool - it is a modular, physical containerisation system, a completely different concept. Paper bag indeed - young people now a days. I throw up my hands*.
(*makes you wonder how I managed to swallow them in the first place, doesn't it?)
Re:I claim prior art by v1 · 2016-09-21 00:00 · Score: 1

Periods don't normally come after unprotected sex.
FTFY

--
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
Re: I claim prior art by macs4all · 2016-09-21 00:03 · Score: 1

And yet none of those are worthy of the attention of Slashdot. Why?
Because this is being done by the biggest tech company in the world, that's why.
Bullshit.
Re: I claim prior art by TheRaven64 · 2016-09-21 00:12 · Score: 2

If you ever visit Apple, go to their cafeteria. Order a pizza. Look at the box: it comes in a custom Apple-designed cardboard box (actually, a very nice design that is smaller than a normal pizza box and stacks better). Look carefully, and you'll see the Apple patent number listed on it. I wanted to take a photograph, but apparently Apple is very strict about people not taking photos anywhere on their campus.

--
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Re: I claim prior art by macs4all · 2016-09-21 00:21 · Score: 1

because with sue happy apple you have to expect the worst
Bullshit. Clickbait, and you are actually defending it!
Re: I claim prior art by macs4all · 2016-09-21 00:29 · Score: 2

Fuck off fanboy.
Ooo! Strong words from an ANONYMOUS. COWARD.
Re:I claim prior art by ausekilis · 2016-09-21 00:36 · Score: 1

Okay, "strong paper bag". What about sick bags in airplanes? Those are typically white and don't break down from stomach acid...
Re: I claim prior art by macs4all · 2016-09-21 00:39 · Score: 1

If you ever visit Apple, go to their cafeteria. Order a pizza. Look at the box: it comes in a custom Apple-designed cardboard box (actually, a very nice design that is smaller than a normal pizza box and stacks better). Look carefully, and you'll see the Apple patent number listed on it. I wanted to take a photograph, but apparently Apple is very strict about people not taking photos anywhere on their campus.
Now go to McDonald's. You'll find the same thing on their coffee cup lids, their Big Mac boxes, French fry containers, et CETERA. SO. THE. FUCK. WHAT?

While your comment is for sure an interesting anecdote, showing that Apple's well-deserved reputation for attention to detail extends even to the MOST mundane aspects of their business, it, like the ENTIRE STORY, STILL ISN'T "News for Nerds. STUFF THWT MATTERS."

But I guess that any publicity is good publicity; so...
Re: I claim prior art by squiggleslash · 2016-09-21 01:57 · Score: 1

Apple is not a fast food company. When MacDonalds patents a new type of smartphone, we'll accept the GP's anecdote was of no interest.

--
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Re: I claim prior art by Nunya666 · 2016-09-21 02:20 · Score: 1

And yet none of those are worthy of the attention of Slashdot. Why?
Because this is being done by the biggest tech company in the world, that's why.
Bullshit.
Bullshit for sure. Apple isn't the biggest tech company in the world, Google is.

MS used to be the biggest tech company in the world, but the malware known as Win10 is changing that.
Re: I claim prior art by mspohr · 2016-09-21 02:48 · Score: 1

Ah... I have -1 filtered. That's how I avoid that garbage.

--
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
Re: I claim prior art by Barlo_Mung_42 · 2016-09-21 03:38 · Score: 1

I think this is just Apple mocking the entire patent system.
Re: I claim prior art by macs4all · 2016-09-21 03:54 · Score: 3, Insightful

And yet none of those are worthy of the attention of Slashdot. Why?
Because this is being done by the biggest tech company in the world, that's why.
Bullshit.
Bullshit for sure. Apple isn't the biggest tech company in the world, Google is. MS used to be the biggest tech company in the world, but the malware known as Win10 is changing that.
All depends on what your metric for "Biggest" is. Most amount of real-estate held? Most number of employees? Most cash in the bank? Most assets of all kinds? Highest market-cap? Highest stock price?

When corporations get the size of Msft, Google or Apple, the term "biggest" gets to be kind of meaningless without further clarification.
Re: I claim prior art by macs4all · 2016-09-21 03:56 · Score: 1

I think this is just Apple mocking the entire patent system.
You'd be wrong about that. Just as McDonald's isn't mocking when it Patents a coffee-cup lid.
Re: I claim prior art by LynnwoodRooster · 2016-09-21 04:21 · Score: 1

Claim one, in its entirety, is:

A retail paper bag, comprising: a bag container formed of white paper with at least 60% post-consumer content.

That is the foundation for claims 2 through 12 (dependent claims). Where they talk about small changes - but still must include this portion. It brings nothing to the table in terms of "how it's made" - just what it is. On its face, this is a bogus claim. Prior art and ZERO novelty here. Which means claim 1 though 12 are all tossed. Instantly. It's like me claiming "a pumpkin pie with at least 80% organic pumpkin". Worthless, no invention.
Claim 13, in its entirety, is:

A paper bag, comprising: a bag container formed of paper, the bag container having a top edge including a notch, and a bag handle formed of paper, wherein an end of the bag handle extends through the notch and is fixed to the bag container, wherein, in the absence of an applied force on the bag handle, when the bag is in an upright orientation the bag handle droops below the top edge of the bag container so that at least 90% of the bag handle is disposed below the top edge of the bag container.

A completely different bag, nothing about post-consumer use or white (and thus should not be included in this patent - there is no tie between claims 1 and 13 other than they are for bags). Just a bag where the handles can slide back down into the bag - again, nothing new or novel here. Been done to death over the years.
The last independent claim, claim 17, is:

A paper bag, comprising: a bag container formed of paper, the bag container having a collar about an opening thereof, wherein the collar is formed by portions of the bag container folded over about the opening, wherein the collar comprises a collar reinforcement insert disposed between the folded-over portions of the bag container, wherein the collar reinforcement insert is corrugated cardboard.

This does not relate to claim 1 (white and post-consumer content being the key elements) nor claim 13 (sliding handles being the key element). So it should be tossed out - it is a different subject matter altogether. And it's a bag with a reinforced opening that is supported by corrugated cardboard. Again, nothing new, it's been done to death.
This is a bogus patent through and through. Done simply to pad some resume somewhere. The "inventors" should be ashamed of themselves and this patent application should be tossed immediately.
For the record, I have a dozen utility patents, with 18 more in the pipeline, and actually get royalties and licensing fees for the ones I personally hold, with those royalties coming from many companies including big ones like Flextronics and Microsoft. They're not fluff where it's patenting a paper bag.

--
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Re: I claim prior art by LynnwoodRooster · 2016-09-21 04:26 · Score: 1

Most of those other patents are more than just fluff. Take a look at the first claim (the base claim for the next 11 claims) of the Apple patent:

A retail paper bag, comprising: a bag container formed of white paper with at least 60% post-consumer content.
Now, take a look at the first claim for a paper cup:

A beverage receptacle comprising: an inner wall of cylindrical construction and having a fixed radius and having an outer surface and an inner surface, a spacer in connection with said outer surface, said spacer disposed upon said outer surface in a spiral configuration with radius corresponding to that of said inner wall, an outer wall of cylindrical construction and of larger diameter than said inner wall, said outerwall in connection with said spacer so as to form an air space between said inner and outer walls.
The first - the Apple claim - has nothing novel, nothing about construction, nothing about process. Just "a white paper bag with at least 60% post consumer content". I guess I can patent a pumpkin pie with at least 80% organic pumpkin content.
The second - the paper cup claim - talks about what it is, how it's built, what the important features are, why it's being done, and important ratios in-between. In other words, there's something there other than just "a cup that is insulated".
This is 100% a trash patent. Resume padding only. And Apple should be ashamed of filing it. Talk about intellectually void....

--
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Re: I claim prior art by jrq · 2016-09-21 05:06 · Score: 1

Patent here: https://www.google.com/patents/US20120024859/
Pizza box here: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bb32PtDIYAAeWl_.jpg/

--
My UID is prime!
Re: I claim prior art by macs4all · 2016-09-21 11:37 · Score: 1

Who cares?
Re: I claim prior art by LynnwoodRooster · 2016-09-21 16:45 · Score: 1

Apparently, when you're shown to be wrong, you care. And you cared enough to post in this thread in the first place. But the fact remains - Apple is attempting to patent a white paper bag with 60% or more post consumer content. Maybe instead of "macs4all" you should change your name to "paperbags4all"...

--
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Re: I claim prior art by macs4all · 2016-09-22 00:34 · Score: 1

Apparently, when you're shown to be wrong, you care. And you cared enough to post in this thread in the first place. But the fact remains - Apple is attempting to patent a white paper bag with 60% or more post consumer content. Maybe instead of "macs4all" you should change your name to "paperbags4all"...
Disingenuousness I expect from an AC; but not you. And a cheap shot ad hominem joke besides...?

But you are smart enough to realize that the main thrust of the patent is not the bag itself; but the REINFORCEMENTS designed into the bag to ALLOW the otherwise-too-weak, bleached 60% recycled paper to be used to actually CARRY something heavier than a Canoli, which apparently IS unique and and "non-obvious" in the "paper-bag" world.
Re: I claim prior art by LynnwoodRooster · 2016-09-22 06:20 · Score: 1

Well, you come in all high-and-mighty with false statements about the patent, and when you're corrected, you go "what does it matter"? Sorry - when you're shown to be wrong - man up, and admit it. Otherwise expect to be ridiculed and slapped down...
Now, about the patent. The first claim in a patent sets the focus of all following claims. The first claim is a white bag made with 60% post consumer content. Claims 2 through 12 are for refinements of that idea. Claim 13 is a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT concept, a handle for a bag. Claims 14-16 are refinements of that. Claim 17 is a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT concept for a reinforced collar on a bag. The three independent claims do NOT relate to the same invention, but 3 separate inventions that can be implemented independently of each other.
In other words, the lead claim, and the two followng independent claims, are completely unrelated to each other. And are covering different scope of work, and thus cannot be bundled together in a single patent. it's all bogus.
Oh, and I've already posted prior art for the independent claims in this patent; there's nothing novel here at all. Why you want to defend this patent - on a paper bag! - is beyond me, other than it's quite clear you're a serious Apple fan...

--
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Re:I claim prior art by poofmeisterp · 2016-09-22 06:55 · Score: 1

In fact, the paper bag was invented by a woman to serve baked goods in, at least the white one Apple describes. The brown paper bag was invented by another woman, too.
Ooh, ooh. A kid down the street (when I was a wee tot) cut two holes in a paper bag to put over his head as a Halloween costume accessory. He's like.. a freaking billionaire now! Awesome idea! /smartass
Re: I claim prior art by poofmeisterp · 2016-09-22 07:00 · Score: 1

And yet none of those are worthy of the attention of Slashdot. Why?
Because this is being done by the biggest tech company in the world, that's why.
Bullshit.
Bullshit for sure. Apple isn't the biggest tech company in the world, Google is.
MS used to be the biggest tech company in the world, but the malware known as Win10 is changing that.
All depends on what your metric for "Biggest" is. Most amount of real-estate held? Most number of employees? Most cash in the bank? Most assets of all kinds? Highest market-cap? Highest stock price?
When corporations get the size of Msft, Google or Apple, the term "biggest" gets to be kind of meaningless without further clarification.
Ok, ok, ok y'all. Settle down. Time for a CEO mud wrestling contest to determine the size of.. er.. the biggest of them all. Pardon me while I vomit after this post.
Re: I claim prior art by Coren22 · 2016-09-22 07:20 · Score: 1

If those 404's were intentional, nicely done, if not, what happened to those links? They both go to a not found page. Did Apple have them taken down already?

--
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
Re: I claim prior art by jrq · 2016-09-22 07:30 · Score: 1

Not intentional.
Odd that they have 404'd.
Hard to believe traffic overload was responsible.

--
My UID is prime!
Re: I claim prior art by macs4all · 2016-09-22 08:45 · Score: 1

Well, you come in all high-and-mighty with false statements about the patent
So, why didn't you tromp on the original AC's post, stating that this was much more than just a silly "Patent on a Paper Bag" (which post sits at +5 Informative, BTW), which my original post was simply in support and an amplification thereof?
Re: I claim prior art by macs4all · 2016-09-22 08:49 · Score: 1

Ok, ok, ok y'all. Settle down. Time for a CEO mud wrestling contest to determine the size of.. er.. the biggest of them all. Pardon me while I vomit after this post.
Or better yet, let's drop all the CEOs off a cliff one-by-one, and see which one bounces the highest...

Now THAT's a Reality Show!!!
Re: I claim prior art by poofmeisterp · 2016-09-22 09:07 · Score: 1

OK got a good laugh from that. Thanks. Unfortunately, prior art.. Lemmings. Did I just say Lemmings? Ooooooooooo! Bad mouth. Bad.
Re: I claim prior art by LynnwoodRooster · 2016-09-23 05:45 · Score: 1

That was an AC, you're not. Simple as that. Plus I generally don't like Apple Asshats...

--
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Re: I claim prior art by macs4all · 2016-09-23 08:03 · Score: 1

That was an AC, you're not. Simple as that. Plus I generally don't like Apple Asshats...
So, you're saying you respect an AC more than someone who puts their Karma on the line; JUST because of their platform-choice?

I thought we already got past all this immature crap, buddy.

Guess not.

And if you truly think you can call me an Asshat, compared with the truly insane, over-the-top, purely ad hominem attacks I have suffered on this forum (almost exclusively from your beloved ACs, BTW), it is you that is the Asshat, not me.

What Courage! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-20 13:18 · Score: 5, Funny

What Courage!

Re:What Courage! by poofmeisterp · 2016-09-22 07:01 · Score: 1

apple will do bags right
I can't wait to see the first release on stage! OMG OMG OMG where will it be; I need tickets nowwww!!!!!

Add another $100 billion to Apple's value. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-20 13:19 · Score: 1

When Apple starts selling these things for $100 a pop, Apple's going to rolling in the dough. They might even, one day, pay taxes on that money.

Re:Add another $100 billion to Apple's value. by LifesABeach · 2016-09-20 13:28 · Score: 1

It will be interesting to see if they do to paper bags like what they've done to upload an app to its store. Profiles anyone?
Re:Add another $100 billion to Apple's value. by TheGratefulNet · 2016-09-20 13:52 · Score: 2

compatibility with iHand is not quite yet perfected.
(cue the 'you're holding it wrong' meme, please. danke.)

--

--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Re:Add another $100 billion to Apple's value. by Immerman · 2016-09-20 14:50 · Score: 2

Don't be ridiculous...
Apple doesn't pay taxes

--
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Re:Add another $100 billion to Apple's value. by AmiMoJo · 2016-09-20 16:45 · Score: 1

It's part of their branding. You already get a bag with an Apple logo on it so that everyone knows you just joined the exclusive club and are worth mugging. If it's a special bag, well that just makes the shopping experience more enjoyable and gives you another thing to bore your Android peasant friends with.

--
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Re:Add another $100 billion to Apple's value. by stealth_finger · 2016-09-20 22:50 · Score: 1

They might even, one day, pay taxes on that money.
HaHa, good one. I'd mod you funny but I already posted.

--
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u

Sounds like a design patent by alvinrod · 2016-09-20 13:29 · Score: 1

Sounds like a design patent, which as the name suggests is pretty much about the look and feel of a common item. I doubt the "8-stitch circular-knit pattern" or the 6.5mm handle gain any particular utility beyond anything else, but it's basically just a way of Apple saying if you make a bag that looks too much like theirs, they can successfully sue you. Similarly, having been granted a patent would be a good defense against anyone trying to sue them over their shopping bags.

Re:Sounds like a design patent by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-20 14:14 · Score: 5, Informative

Go read the patent. This isn't a design patent. It's a patent on how to reinforce or fold the edges of a paper bag to make it strong enough to have 60% or more of recycled material. Using more recycled material makes the bag weaker, so they've strengthened the corners and edges by folding down a flap of paper or gluing on a flap of paper (I don't understand how that isn't obvious). Look at the image. I've seen bags that look exactly like that, except they probably weren't 60% recycled. This is Apple about to publicly advertise that since they care so much about the environment, their bags will be more environmentally friendly than every one else's, while quietly suing everyone else behind the scenes to keep them from making 'greener' products. Look at how environmentally friendly we are by preventing companies from using recycled materials unless they pay us! All hail the innovative Apple. Good PR, better marketing, and another revenue stream!
Look at this claim:

[0058] It will be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art that many modifications and variations are possible in view of the above teachings, and that by applying knowledge within the skill of the art, one may readily modify and/or adapt for various applications such specific embodiments, without undue experimentation, without departing from the general concept of the present invention. For example, in some embodiments, instead of or in addition to reinforcement inserts to strengthen the bag container having high (e.g., greater than 50%, 60%, greater than 60%) post-consumer-content, a matte plastic film may be applied to bag container 200, the matte plastic film having a higher resistance to tearing than the other material of bag container 200. Such film could be applied to one or both of the entirety of the interior surface or exterior surface of bag container 200, or to discrete areas thereof (e.g., the areas corresponding to those reinforced by reinforcement inserts as described in above embodiments).
The patent.
Re:Sounds like a design patent by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-21 00:03 · Score: 3, Informative

Go read the patent. This isn't a design patent. It's a patent on how to reinforce or fold the edges of a paper bag to make it strong enough to have 60% or more of recycled material. Using more recycled material makes the bag weaker, so they've strengthened the corners and edges by folding down a flap of paper or gluing on a flap of paper (I don't understand how that isn't obvious). Look at the image. I've seen bags that look exactly like that, except they probably weren't 60% recycled. This is Apple about to publicly advertise that since they care so much about the environment, their bags will be more environmentally friendly than every one else's, while quietly suing everyone else behind the scenes to keep them from making 'greener' products. Look at how environmentally friendly we are by preventing companies from using recycled materials unless they pay us! All hail the innovative Apple. Good PR, better marketing, and another revenue stream!
Look at this claim:

[0058] It will be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art that many modifications and variations are possible in view of the above teachings, and that by applying knowledge within the skill of the art, one may readily modify and/or adapt for various applications such specific embodiments, without undue experimentation, without departing from the general concept of the present invention. For example, in some embodiments, instead of or in addition to reinforcement inserts to strengthen the bag container having high (e.g., greater than 50%, 60%, greater than 60%) post-consumer-content, a matte plastic film may be applied to bag container 200, the matte plastic film having a higher resistance to tearing than the other material of bag container 200. Such film could be applied to one or both of the entirety of the interior surface or exterior surface of bag container 200, or to discrete areas thereof (e.g., the areas corresponding to those reinforced by reinforcement inserts as described in above embodiments).
The patent.
The part in bold that you are mentioning will be ignored (and subsequently removed) by any sane examiner in the later stages of the process. Such parts of the /description/ commonly try to enlarge the scope of protection beyond that of the claimed subject-matter and hence are not allowed due to lack of clarity (of scope). What matters are the claims. If the description is broader than the claims, it either becomes a clarity problem and will be removed, or the claims have to be amended to bring claims and description in unison, before the patent is granted. Ideally. In the USPTO, vague formulations like 'spirit of the invention' is often use to cover more than it should. This way there is a grey area what is and what is not in the 'spirit' of the invention, in case someone opposes the patent or comes up with derived (but different) products which do not fall in the scope of the claims. Since lately 'spirit of the invention' is searched for directly they came up with the 'general concept' formulation, which is less vague, but still not desired. Btw, it's not a patent yet.
Re:Sounds like a design patent by LynnwoodRooster · 2016-09-21 04:34 · Score: 1

Go read the patent. This isn't a design patent. It's a patent on how to reinforce or fold the edges of a paper bag to make it strong enough to have 60% or more of recycled material.
Yes, go read the patent. It says NO SUCH THING. The three independent claims - 1, 13 and 17 - have NOTHING to do with each other. They are not related at all. The first is about a white bag with recycled material. The 13th is about sliding handles. The 17th is about a reinforced collar. They are all independent of each other and can be implemented in their entirety without the others (that's the definition of an independent claim).
Not to mention having a single patent cover multiple "inventions" is not allowed, there must be some sort of continuity between the claims, independent or not, such that the subject of the patent is unique, novel, and well defined.
It's says NOTHING about making a bag strong enough to have recycle material. Nothing.
Look at this claim: [0058] It will be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art
That's not a claim you dolt. That's a description and does not relate to the actual claims in any way other than to serve as potentially limiting their scope. The claims say NOTHING of what you claim.

--
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Re:Sounds like a design patent by Cederic · 2016-09-21 06:10 · Score: 1

This is Apple about to publicly advertise that since they care so much about the environment, their bags will be more environmentally friendly than every one else's
At which point the ASA will slap them because they're quite obviously less environmentally than the unbleached recycled paper bags that also used less material because they didn't need the reinforcement.
Re:Sounds like a design patent by rpstrong · 2016-09-22 04:35 · Score: 1

That was my thought, but the document has a Kind Code of 'A1', Patent Application Publication. A design patent has a Kind Code of 'S'.

Unpatent.co by olsmeister · 2016-09-20 13:30 · Score: 1, Informative

Sounds like it should be sent to Unpatent.
https://unpatent.co/

A similar patent was filed by A. Elk by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-20 13:31 · Score: 1

Design and method for finding one's way out of a paper bag.

Here's A. Elk discussing some of her previous research..

2000 by hcs_$reboot · 2016-09-20 13:36 · Score: 1

Apple applies for 2000 patents a year. Now a bag of paper, tomorrow the wheel.

--
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...

Re:2000 by LynnwoodRooster · 2016-09-21 04:39 · Score: 1

I give you The only 100% Recycled White Kraft - minimum 95% post consumer content bag, prior art from 2009. This patent is not novel, it is not unique, it is not non-obvious. It is bogus, 100%.

--
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!

Amazing example of Slashdot wasted time by frnic · 2016-09-20 13:38 · Score: 1, Insightful

Hard to imagine so many people with so little to do to make the world a better place, for just themselves or everyone, that they need to sit around in anticipation of the next post on Slashdot about anything Apple so they can spew worthless trype.

Re:Amazing example of Slashdot wasted time by willoughby · 2016-09-20 14:23 · Score: 2

Hard to imagine so many people with so little to do to make the world a better place, for just themselves or everyone, that they need to sit around carefully composing the language for a patent of a paper bag.
Re:Amazing example of Slashdot wasted time by frnic · 2016-09-20 17:44 · Score: 1

I am retired, so I have plenty of time, and I have practice my cello I recently started learning.
Re:Amazing example of Slashdot wasted time by polyp2000 · 2016-09-20 19:33 · Score: 4, Insightful

"Hard to imagine so many people with so little to do to make the world a better place" ... And patenting an "environmentally friendly" paper bag does exactly what? Apple (tm) - making it harder for others to look after the planet ?

--
Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
Re:Amazing example of Slashdot wasted time by Maritz · 2016-09-20 21:35 · Score: 1

You think Android explodes? You think that's a software thing? lol.

--
I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.

With a 5 digit Slashdot UID... by mister_playboy · 2016-09-20 14:12 · Score: 1, Insightful

With a 5 digit Slashdot UID, you've surely wasted more time here than most of us have.

Don't hurt yourself clutching those pearls, old sport.

--
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law ::: Love is the law, love under will

ding dong dash by PopeRatzo · 2016-09-20 14:22 · Score: 1

I've got the patent on the paper back filled with dog poop lit on fire and left on a doorstep.

I can live off the license payments from Halloween alone.

--
You are welcome on my lawn.

Good for them by invictusvoyd · 2016-09-20 14:36 · Score: 1

Apple is going to eventually end up selling paper bags. And Microsoft is going to do the printing.

Re:Good for them by rworne · 2016-09-20 15:12 · Score: 2

Apple is going to eventually end up selling paper bags. And Microsoft is going to do the printing.
Now Samsung will quickly design and release SamsungBag(TM), releasing it month or so before Apple releases their reinvented iBag...

--
I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
Re:Good for them by tyme · 2016-09-20 15:37 · Score: 2

after which the SamsungBag will be recalled because it, unexpectedly and spontaneously, bursts into flames.

--
just a ghost in the machine.
Re:Good for them by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-20 17:27 · Score: 2

Meanwhile, suckers will queue for days to pay $200 for a paper bag.
Re:Good for them by JustBoo · 2016-09-20 23:20 · Score: 1

Apple is going to eventually end up selling paper bags. And Microsoft is going to do the printing.
What the report didn't tell you is the paper-bag has a chip in it (why not) and if you hold the Bag wrong it will report you.
Woe to the one left holding the bag!
Re:Good for them by Win0ver · 2016-09-21 01:20 · Score: 1

The Samsung Paper Bag will be more paper, and water proof.
Re:Good for them by poofmeisterp · 2016-09-22 06:56 · Score: 1

Apple is going to eventually end up selling paper bags. And Microsoft is going to do the printing.
I have exclusive rights on selling apples in a paper bag. Dibs!
Re:Good for them by Plumpaquatsch · 2016-09-29 19:52 · Score: 1

Apple is going to eventually end up selling paper bags. And Microsoft is going to do the printing.
Now Samsung will quickly design and release SamsungBag(TM), releasing it month or so before Apple releases their reinvented iBag...
And it will be made of cheap plastic and explode 10 minutes after you received it.

--
Of course news about a fake are Fake News.

But the Apple paper bag is better by aliquis · 2016-09-20 14:41 · Score: 1

Just one handle. Less confusion.

Re:But the Apple paper bag is better by JaredOfEuropa · 2016-09-20 22:38 · Score: 1

And rounded corners and edges. No more paper cuts.

--
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
Re:But the Apple paper bag is better by stealth_finger · 2016-09-20 22:49 · Score: 1

Next version they'll get rid of the antiquated handle and claim most people carry the bags as a clutch anyway.

--
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Re:But the Apple paper bag is better by aliquis · 2016-09-21 01:25 · Score: 1

Or replace it with a nipple because nipples.
Nipplebag maybe.

Re:What sort of morons work in the patent office? by aliquis · 2016-09-20 14:49 · Score: 1

Surely even a half-trained carrot would have recognised that a paper bag, any paper bag, is subject prior art and therefore should have rejected the patent.

So you mean one can't patent a dildo?

After all Abraham Lincoln has prior art to all of them:
http://www.malquotes.com/image...
(First hit on fake quotes on Google image search.)

Re:I've said it before... by Dog-Cow · 2016-09-20 15:17 · Score: 1

A lie repeated does not become truth, though it may be believed.

Re:What sort of morons work in the patent office? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-20 15:38 · Score: 1

Surely even a half-illiterate squirrel monkey would have recognised that the patent isn't for "a paper bag"?

Re:pearly white by Opportunist · 2016-09-20 16:59 · Score: 1

Mostly 'cause Donovan threatened to sue when he tried to call it "Mellow Yellow".

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.

If you put it that way... by blindseer · 2016-09-20 17:04 · Score: 4, Insightful

Anything sounds absurd if worded the right way. Examples:

Alexander Bell patents talking to a wire.

Henry Ford builds a mechanical horse.

Wright Brothers claim wood and fabric allow a man to float through the air.

Americans fly Eagle to the moon.

Saying that Apple patented a paper bag is so missing the point that it's bound to be mocked. If one actually reads the linked article (I know, this is Slashdot) then it becomes clear how the title is almost certainly intended to be misleading.

Is it so hard to come up with something that wouldn't be so laughable? How about, "Apple Patents New Ideas on Humble Paper Bag"?

--
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.

Re:If you put it that way... by Carewolf · 2016-09-20 20:04 · Score: 1, Insightful

Anything sounds absurd if worded the right way. Examples:
Alexander Bell patents talking to a wire.
Henry Ford builds a mechanical horse.
Wright Brothers claim wood and fabric allow a man to float through the air.
Americans fly Eagle to the moon.
Saying that Apple patented a paper bag is so missing the point that it's bound to be mocked. If one actually reads the linked article (I know, this is Slashdot) then it becomes clear how the title is almost certainly intended to be misleading.
Is it so hard to come up with something that wouldn't be so laughable? How about, "Apple Patents New Ideas on Humble Paper Bag"?
Did you just compare the iPaperBag to the invention of the telephone, car and airplane?
Dude, you have an iProblem.
Re:If you put it that way... by JustBoo · 2016-09-20 23:43 · Score: 1

The Real Reason can now be revealed.
All those wayward Apple fanbois with all those inflatable sex-dolls had to be addressed. Tim Cook knows it's a problem.
Now they can put the pearly-white iBagger over the heads of their beloved dolls (and whatnot) and really, I mean really, really Go To Town on their true Love while staring at the most important thing in their lives. Win / win.
Re:If you put it that way... by Big+Hairy+Ian · 2016-09-21 00:09 · Score: 2

Basically they've patented reinforcing a paper bag because bleaching it makes the paper flimsy. Of course the rest of the world was quite happy with brown paper bags!

--
Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.
Re:If you put it that way... by thegarbz · 2016-09-21 00:22 · Score: 1

Wait what? Do you have white paper bags?
Re:If you put it that way... by Big+Hairy+Ian · 2016-09-21 00:44 · Score: 1

No! That would be racist obviously

--
Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.
Re:If you put it that way... by argStyopa · 2016-09-21 00:46 · Score: 1

Except...it IS worth mockery.
http://pdfaiw.uspto.gov/.aiw?D...
They're trying to patent a paper bag with handles.
Please, if I'm missing some stunning new Apple magic here, let me know.

--
-Styopa
Re:If you put it that way... by bozzy · 2016-09-21 01:05 · Score: 1

The title was meant to be click bait.

--
playmoney.me - The free alternative to paper board game play money
Re:If you put it that way... by blindseer · 2016-09-21 11:04 · Score: 1

Did you just compare the iPaperBag to the invention of the telephone, car and airplane?
No, I said anything can sound absurd if worded the right way. That includes some of the greatest technology achievements in human history.
The advance this made in human civilization was quite small here but then I imagine so many patents are. So many big things come from so many small things. We have the airplanes we fly today because of trivial little advancements like developing a better rivet. An advancement like that could be introduced with, "Company Inc. Patents New Rivet!" or "New Rivet Reduces Aircraft Aerodynamic Drag by 5%!"
The writing of bad headlines is so common its become a comedic trope. Compare, "Dwarf Psychic Escapes Prison!" to "Small Medium At Large!"
I'm not saying this is some leap in technology here. It's a cute little story about Apple, which a lot of people here might find interesting. The title though is so bad I have to wonder if it was an attempt at Apple bashing, an attempt at click bait, or someone just not taking pride in their work.

--
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.

Claims in patent applications by XNormal · 2016-09-20 17:05 · Score: 1

1. Inventor makes some new and non-obvious improvement to prior art. "I did A with B using C by way of D"

2. In patent application, the patent editor tries to widen the claim to. "A with B using C", "A using C by way of D" or even all the way to the silly and obvious "A".

3. Patent examiner rejects most claims. Some widened claims, beyond what the inventor considered to be his invention, are accepted by the examiner because they really are novel and non-obvious. The patent is now more valuable too inventor (or, more often, his employer) because it covers more things.

This process of trying to extend the claims by making them more general is quite mechanical. Patent editors do it almost automatically and without really trying to think too hard if the result makes much sense.

Sometimes overworked examiners accept silly over-generalized claims on an application and it makes it into a granted patent. It is a serious problem with the system (or a win, if you are the submitting company). Such claims may be overturned later in court, but most patent lawsuits are settled out of court, never challenging such claims because of the costs and risks involved. This makes such over generalized patents a weapon for bullies.

Sometimes, if you are a high-profile company that is under the public eye, people will pick such unexamined claims in a patent application and make them into a silly headline "company X tries to patent obvious thing Y!!!".

--
Stop worrying about the risks of nuclear power and start worrying about the risks of not using nuclear power.

Re:Claims in patent applications by Shortguy881 · 2016-09-21 01:38 · Score: 1

Yeah but this is a paper bag we are talking about. What non-obvious improvement on the paper bag is worth patenting? Give me a class room of kinder gardeners, recycled paper and glue and one of them will recreate Apple's claimed magic.

--
Brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.

A way of reinforcing it and a retracting handle by raymorris · 2016-09-20 18:14 · Score: 4, Informative

More specifically, they *applied* to patent a particular way of reinforcing a paper bag made of white recycled paper, and a particular type of self-retracting handle that falls down into the bag, made of twisted paper.

Bleached recycled paper tends to be weak, so that's why reinforcement would be good.

I don't know whether the patent will ever issue. If it does, it will probably be narrowed in scope first. The usual process is that the applicant writes the initial application to be as broad as they think they might get away with, then it's made more specific as needed to actually get approved.

Re:A way of reinforcing it and a retracting handle by MachineShedFred · 2016-09-20 23:37 · Score: 2

Now don't go bringing reality into this perfect troll bait article! Don't you understand that merely using the words "apple" and "patent" in a Slashdot post is worth 75+ comments on rounded corners alone?
The new owners have to keep the numbers up somehow!

--
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.

What the actual fuck by stealth_finger · 2016-09-20 19:40 · Score: 1

A paper bag? What the fuck, not necessarily apple but the patent office for giving it. If you've invented a new type of strong paper, fair enough, patent that, but you can't (shouldn't) be able to patent a bag for fucks sake. Especially such a generic looking one.

--
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u

Re:What the actual fuck by afgam28 · 2016-09-20 21:14 · Score: 2

You can patent the design of a paper bag though. This doesn't stop people making paper bags in general, but it does stop others from using the exact same design.
This is called a "design patent". Utility patents, which are probably what you're thinking of, are the ones that require novelty and non-obviousness.
The submitter and/or editor are either ignorant of this or being intentionally misleading.
Re:What the actual fuck by stealth_finger · 2016-09-20 22:23 · Score: 1

I've been into a shitload of shops that have bag designs that look like that, I'm sure you have too. Prior art.

--
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Re:What the actual fuck by 91degrees · 2016-09-20 23:54 · Score: 1

They didn't patent a paper bag. They did patent a specific design to make a paper bag with increased strength. The patent is not on using paper to make a bag. This is not how patents work. Patents protect specific techniques. This is what the patent is protecting.

Apple Patents a Paper Bag by jandersen · 2016-09-20 21:04 · Score: 1

- and soon they will have to recall them because they can explode in certain conditions, like when pressure builds up on the inside and suddenly applied externally.

Misleading headline by wvmarle · 2016-09-20 21:53 · Score: 1

A more correct headline would be "Apple patents design of paper bag". Sounds a lot more sensible, doesn't it? I'm sure they've patented plenty of boxes and plastic bags and computer casings and mobile phone casings and headphones and whatnot. Pretty much anything they designed can be patented and be protected with a design patent.

This what happens when 1) someone who knows nothing about patents creates submission and 2) editors who know nothing about patents approve it. Add to that 3) a crowd of commentators who know nothing about patents and well, welcome to Slashdot.

It's just yet another a design patent, nothing to see here, please move along. Just one of many designs Apple has patented, and not just Apple but many many companies do this as a matter of course.

But does it ... by belgianpainter · 2016-09-20 22:02 · Score: 1

... run systemd?

I has a bag by portwojc · 2016-09-20 22:37 · Score: 1

Let's get around these claims....

1. Make a bag with at least 59% post consumer content. Or to be extra picky less than 59%.
2. Don't allow the handle to droop. If you do the handle may only droop at most 89% of the top edge into the bag container.
3. Don't user corrugated cardboard for the collar.

HOLY MOLY! What will they think of next?!?! by sabbede · 2016-09-20 23:31 · Score: 1

Sure, bags are nothing new, but this one is made of paper!!!!

And to think, people thought that Apple would be less innovative without Steve Jobs. I guess Tim showed them!

Apple's words, not ours. by mjwx · 2016-09-20 23:32 · Score: 1

Anything sounds absurd if worded the right way.

Are you that tragic a fanboy, direct from the patent applicaiton, so Apple's words, not mine:

1. A retail paper bag, comprising: a bag container formed of white paper with at least 60% post-consumer content.

US Patent application 20160264304

Here's a picture

Tell me that's not Apple patenting a paper bag and how the evil "Hateurs" are twisting it out of proportion.

Also your knowledge of history sucks.

Henry Ford builds a mechanical horse.

Henry Ford did not patent the automobile. That would be George B Selden and he held it hostage until Ford challenged him in court. Selden was a lot like Apple, making patents and threatening others with them to extort licensing fees. Probably not the first patent troll, but one of the pioneers in the field. Same as Ford didn't invent the car, but was instrumental in making the car what it is today (Ford's major contributions were in the manufacturing process, the Model T was actually a terrible car but it was affordable and easily built which was a first for cars).

Basically, your entire post is so horribly, horribly wrong.

--
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.

Re:Bad experience. by JustBoo · 2016-09-20 23:32 · Score: 1

I carried my new Apple headphones home in one of these new Apple bags and they got stuck. So frustrating. I couldn't get my Beats out of a paper bag.

Which kind of proves the old saying that Apple-Nauts have a hard time finding their way out of a paper-bag. Funny 'cos it's true. Yeah.

Reminds me of the space pen myth by AC-x · 2016-09-20 23:33 · Score: 1

White paper bags made of recycled material tend to be fairly flimsy due to the amount of bleach used

This reminds me of the space pen myth (the "NASA spent millions developing a pen that would work in zero G while Russia used a pencil" one), except this time it's Apple spending millions developing a strong bleached paper bag while everyone else uses unbleached brown paper.

I can't wait by NotSoHeavyD3 · 2016-09-20 23:37 · Score: 1

for a company to paint their logo on brick and then patent their own paper weight.

--
Did you know 80 to 90% of the moderators on slashdot wouldn't recognize a troll even if one dragged them under a bridge.

The patent’s novelty is not about bags by Theovon · 2016-09-20 23:38 · Score: 1

I want to start by saying that I’m never going to buy an iPhone 7. I understand that removing the audio jack saved some room inside the iPhone. But the water proofing argument is stupid, the “courage argument” is bullshit, and the primary benefit is to Apple’s bottom line to sell us more expensive adapters and annoying wireless earphones.

I’ll buy a MacBook Pro because of the extended warranty, the fact that a comparable PC laptop costs only a little less (and looks less cool), industry support for Linux on laptops sucks, and I hate Windows. I bought an iPhone 6+ because I’m too lazy to research to find out which Android phone is the best, I can be sure that the iPhone is at least “good,” and I have an investment already in iPhone apps. But I hope to God (and all the other deities) that Apple fans are smart enough to sit this one out. Apple needs to get smacked hard in the pocketbook for such a stupid decision.

That being said, this patent is not about paper bags. It’s about making a more sturdy glossy white paper (from which you can make a bag) out of recycled materials.

Re:What sort of morons work in the patent office? by 91degrees · 2016-09-20 23:48 · Score: 1

The patent is on the idea of making a bag out of paper. It is about a specific method of constructing the bag to allow for sufficient strength.

The current design of paper bag solves this by not using recycled paper. Apple have developed a different method that allows the use of recycled paper.

we are waiting for it. by ctrl-alt-canc · 2016-09-21 01:31 · Score: 1

It will be a nice add to our collection.

"and", the word is "and" by raymorris · 2016-09-21 02:41 · Score: 1

> except, reinforcing a paper bag with paper around the handle attachment

The reinforcement isn't around the handle. The singificant patent claims are:

a) a particular type of reinforcement (extra paper cut to a certain shape in glued in a certain way)

AND

b) a particular type of twisted paper handle which slides down into the bag when not in use.

Re:What sort of morons work in the patent office? by TangoMargarine · 2016-09-21 03:34 · Score: 1

There's no money in the budget for training. They only use untrained carrots.

--
Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF

Re:*Applied* to patent a paper bag by TangoMargarine · 2016-09-21 03:37 · Score: 1

You say *applied,* I say practically nothing gets across the patent officers' desks without getting blindly rubberstamped these days.

--
Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF

I am glad by Oswald+McWeany · 2016-09-21 04:34 · Score: 1

I am glad Apple invented the computer, the smart telephone, the digital music player, the tablet PC, the smart watch and now the paper bag.

Wait?!?!?! What?!?!?!?! They didn't invent any of those things- they just claim credit for it? I don't believe you! Now, excuse me whilst I go watch my streaming TV player that Apple also invented.

--
"That's the way to do it" - Punch

Re:What sort of morons work in the patent office? by LynnwoodRooster · 2016-09-21 04:41 · Score: 1

From the patent application, claim 1, in its entirety:

1. A retail paper bag, comprising: a bag container formed of white paper with at least 60% post-consumer content.

Apple has, in fact, claimed it patented a white paper bag with 60%+ post consumer content. That is for "a paper bag".

--
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!

Re:What sort of morons work in the patent office? by LynnwoodRooster · 2016-09-21 04:44 · Score: 1

BS. Utter BS. Here is prior art. For a patent to be valid, each and every independent claim must stand on its own, with no support. See claim 1 of the patent application. It's 100% covered by my link, from a 2009 product. You cannot assume anything beyond which that is described in the claim section itself; that is what is patented - the claims. And this fails hugely as a patent on a white paper bag with recycled content.

--
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!

Re:HOLY MOLY! What will they think of next?!?! by bkmoore · 2016-09-21 05:13 · Score: 1

Sure, bags are nothing new, but this one is made of paper....

and it's made from the pulp from an apple tree!!!

Some People couldn't... by bkmoore · 2016-09-21 05:14 · Score: 1

patent their way out of a paper bag. Oh wait, that's patented too.

Driverless car by mutherhacker · 2016-09-21 06:28 · Score: 1

It's for when you throw up in their driverless iCar...

Re:What sort of morons work in the patent office? by 91degrees · 2016-09-21 09:15 · Score: 1

For a patent to be valid, each and every independent claim must stand on its own, with no support.

Nope. Completely wrong. For a patent to be invalid, all of those claims must by invalid. Claim 2 is a completely different invention from claim 1. If an invention violated claim 17 and no other it infringes the patent

The paper bag in claim 1 is the paper bag as described in the description. The claim doesn't go into description because it is just explaining what the patent claims. That is; it claims the white paper bag described in the description.

Re:What sort of morons work in the patent office? by LynnwoodRooster · 2016-09-21 09:36 · Score: 1

Check the patent. Claims 2 through 12 are dependent on claim 1. If claim 1 is invalid - then claims 2 through 12 are invalid, too. Dependent claims are dependent on their parent. Claim 1 gets tossed - then all the dependent claims get tossed as well.

--
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!

What... by Mats+Svensson · 2016-09-21 10:20 · Score: 1

Whats in the bag?

Whats in the bag?!!!

Whats... in... the.... bag?

WHATS

IN

THE

BAG

?
?
?

Re:What sort of morons work in the patent office? by LynnwoodRooster · 2016-09-21 16:43 · Score: 1

Patents are evaluated by their claims, not their descriptions. Independent claims are the parts that define the basis for the invention. Claim 1 is the independent claim for dependent claims 2-12. It is to stand on its own, and define the invention that is claimed. Which is - as explicitly written - a white paper bag with 60% or more post-consumer content.

--
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!

Re:What sort of morons work in the patent office? by 91degrees · 2016-09-21 19:26 · Score: 1

That's not how it works at all.

Claim 5 is "A retail paper bag, comprising: a bag container formed of white paper with at least 60% post-consumer content comprising a reinforcement insert adhered to an interior of the bag container, wherein the reinforcement insert is adhered across a fold of the bag container"

If claims 1 to 4 are invalid, but you also have a reinforcement insert adhered across a fold of the bag container, then you are infringing claim 5. The only time claim 1 will come in here is if your product is not a bag formed of at least 60% post-consumer content.

Re:What sort of morons work in the patent office? by LynnwoodRooster · 2016-09-22 06:25 · Score: 1

Sorry, no. If you do not violate claim 1, then you do not violate the dependent claims. Dependent claims limit the scope of the dependent claim. They can be used to cover explicit corner cases, but they cannot expand the scope of the independent claim. That's the law.

"Claims written in dependent form that broaden the scope of the claim from which they depend are considered to be in improper dependent form, which should result in an objection."

--
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!

Re:I've said it before... by ElectricHellKnight · 2016-09-22 06:59 · Score: 1

A lie repeated does not become truth, though it may be believed.

Fucking pseudo-intellectual garbage. You just had that one in the chamber, didn't you? Supposedly meaningful insight, on what was clearly a humorous post. You're not some great speaker, you're some jackass on Slashdot, just like me.

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt." -Abraham Lincoln

See? I can do it too. And I can actually give credit to the better man than me who said it.

Re:What sort of morons work in the patent office? by 91degrees · 2016-09-22 08:00 · Score: 1

The claims narrow the scope. Claim 1 is "A retail paper bag, comprising: a bag container formed of white paper with at least 60% post-consumer content".

Claim 4 is the narrower claim of "A retail paper bag, comprising: a bag container formed of white paper with at least 60% post-consumer content comprising a reinforcement insert adhered to an interior of the bag container"

Claim 5 is the even narrower claim of "A retail paper bag, comprising: a bag container formed of white paper with at least 60% post-consumer content comprising a reinforcement insert adhered to an interior of the bag container, wherein the reinforcement insert is adhered across a fold of the bag container"

So while the broad claim may not be valid, a dependant claim of narrower scope may well be. This is not about whether a product infringes. In this case, a product can't infringe claim 5 without also infringing claims 4 and 1. But if claims 1 and 4 are shown to be invalid due to obviousness, 5 is not.

Re:What sort of morons work in the patent office? by LynnwoodRooster · 2016-09-22 13:39 · Score: 1

I take it you're patent lawyer? I've been down this path several times (defending my own patents, as well as trying to attack others). Never seen a case where a dependent claim survived removal of the independent claim. A narrowing of scope doesn't survive if the fundamental basis was bad in the first place. It's why you do several independent claims that are broad, narrow, narrowest. Rather than do what Apple did which is 3 completely unrelated independent claims.

--
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!

Re:What sort of morons work in the patent office? by 91degrees · 2016-09-22 19:26 · Score: 1

No. But I am capable of reading

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/35/282

A patent shall be presumed valid. Each claim of a patent (whether in independent, dependent, or multiple dependent form) shall be presumed valid independently of the validity of other claims; dependent or multiple dependent claims shall be presumed valid even though dependent upon an invalid claim.

Re:What sort of morons work in the patent office? by 91degrees · 2016-09-22 19:56 · Score: 1

Sorry. Reread what you said in previous comment.

I see why I'm confused. Yes. You're right, because you're talking about whether a product infringes. I'm not talking about whether you're infringing. I'm talking about whether the claims are valid in the first place.

Re:What sort of morons work in the patent office? by LynnwoodRooster · 2016-09-23 05:47 · Score: 1

No worries! That is correct - you cannot really infringe a dependent claim without infringing its independent claim, too. Now many times you have multiple dependent claims in a patent, because you assume the very broad independent claim will get tossed, and thus the dependent claims will survive once all that is stuffed together. For example, a white paper bag with 60% or more post-consumer content will get tossed, but some of the dependent claims (with much more detail) may survive.

--
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!

Slashdot Mirror

Apple Patents a Paper Bag (theguardian.com)

129 of 202 comments (clear)