Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 09:10:09 01/08/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 08, 2004 at 11:23:55, Ed Trice wrote: >Hello Dave, > > >>> >>>Was not flight via an internal combustion engine pre-existing? >> >>No. As a matter of fact. The Wright brothers were the first EVER to fly a self >>powered aircraft. Naturally, their aircraft used an internal combustion engine, >>not a jet engine. >> > >You missed my point entirely. The jet engine came AFTER the Wright flyer. Dr. >Hyatt claimed you cannot patent something that is BASED ON something that >already exists. And that is correct. You can not patent a "jet aircraft". You patent the "jet engine". I don't believe you can even patent "aircraft" as that is too general and the birds of the world would take issue. > >The jet engine "is based on" the engine used to produce the first flight. No it isn't. A jet engine is totally different from an internal combustion engine, which _was_ patented by the way. > >>> >> >>No, Ed, microwave ovens do not work anything like conventional convection ovens. > >I understand this Dave, the point again was demonstrating that the microwave >followed after the conventional oven, and Dr. Hyatt said that in his view, this >would not be allowable as a patent since it is not entirely different. You are missing the point. You don't patent "oven". Because a hole in a rock with a shelf is an oven, and it has existed for thousands of years. You can patent an oven that uses microwaves as the energy source. You can patent an oven that uses heat convection produced by high circulation flow. That has also been done. The point is that you patent a _thing_ not a vaporous description. You supply specifications, engineering drawings, material lists, principles of operation, and so forth, to fully show what you are doing is different, and why. Otherwise you could patent a 2-engine jet and I could follow up with 3-engine patents. Your _game_ is somewhat different than normal chess, although I don't believe it meets the criteria for "no prior-existing art" in patent law. I am talking about _playing_ your game, not building a chess board and pieces for your game and selling that. Patent law does not go there.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.