Patent myths and research

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Mar 23, 2003
Messages
2,075
Location
USA
Gang, there seem to be enough misconceptions about patents that I thought some information might be useful to you. This will be a bit long, so forgive me and bear with me.

A lot of people seem to believe that miraculous patented inventions have been bought and kept off the market by the evil corporations, particularly the oil and automotive types. Here's the reality:

1. Patents are public record. All of them. They have to be, so that new inventions don't inadvertently duplicate old ones.

2. US patents are available online. More on this below.

3. Patents have a limited term. Then anyone can copy and use the invention. Depending on the type of patent, the exclusive term is up to 20 years in the US. Until 1995, it had traditionally been 17 years for most patents. In other English-speaking industrialized nations, the term has traditionally been 16 years. The idea is to give the inventor time to profit or sell, then make the invention available for the public good.

However, trademarks have a generally open-ended lifespan. You can't call your new carbonated soda "Coca-Cola", even though that name has been in use for over 100 years, because the trademark is still in use and valid. In the US both patents and trademarks are handled by the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).

Also, do not conflate patents or trademarks with copyrights that cover the contents of printed or electronic media. In the US the Library of Congress handles copyrights. For many works they are good for the life of the author plus 70 years, or for up to 120 years from the date of creation.

4. You can't patent ideas. Broadly speaking, you can patent only inventions involving something tangible. (The same principle applies to copyrights: you can't copyright ideas or information--only the specific phrasing and format in a work.)

This all means that patents can't be bought and kept secret from everyone forever, as some seem to think. In fact, as a government public record, US patents are not copyrighted, though the rules for foreign patents may be different. Now let's look at how you can research them.

When you think of a patent, you probably think of the simple serial number that you see on many products: example, US Patent No. 6,500,000. That is known as a "utility" patent and covers roughly 90% of all patents. Other types begin with letters followed by a serial number. The two of most interest to fellow BITOG members would be Design patents, beginning with D, or Reissues, beginning with RE. Design patents cover such things as styling elements, including car grilles and so forth. Reissues correct utility patents and will refer to the original patent involved. Other patent series include Plant (PP) patents that cover flora, and these go back longer than you think--to 1931.

The utility series started with No. 1 in 1836 and continues today in the 6,700,000 range. Design patents are in the range of D490,000; reissues, which are far rarer, are in the range of RE14000.

Now here are some terms you will need to know for research.

The title is just that: essentially the name of the invention used as the headline for the patent.

The abstract summarizes the invention in a paragraph or so.

The inventor is the person or persons who created the invention, and US custom generally requires an individual's name to appear here. The last name is all that is required.

The assignee or in European usage the applicant is the person or company that the inventor did the work for or has chosen to transfer rights to. Here's an example: Charles Jones patented a lot of inventions related to the rotary engine for Curtiss-Wright in the 1970s. Jones is the inventor, Curtiss-Wright the assignee/applicant.

A lone inventor without corporate backing will not have an assignee/applicant. European practice differs, especially on older patents, and it is possible to find an individual inventor's name in the "applicant" slot with the "inventor" slot blank.

The classification number describes where the invention falls on an outline. The US system is different from the European system, and for more information, you should refer to the specific patent websites.

You may also find patents by date issued. The full date is not required for such a search; the year is sufficient. Online software does not allow a search by date ranges, though.

Now for the nitty-gritty.

US patents back to No. 1 in 1836 are available in facsimile form (that is, a copy of the original document) on the USPTO website. Viewing them will require special, but free, TIFF software that allows downloading only one page at a time. This is deliberate, to avoid overloading computers and servers, but most automotive-related patents run no more than 10-15 pages. Also, text without illustrations from patents issued since 1 January 1976 is available and searchable online using the above parameters. Patents issued before then are searchable only by patent number or US classification number. Here is the USPTO site to start:

http://www.uspto.gov/patft/index.html

The Espacenet website, which is related to the European patent office, is an excellent alternative for US utility and Canadian and European patents issued since 1920. All available patents are searchable by all the parameters defined above. A specific US patent number must be preceded by "US" in the appropriate blank: example, US6500000. US design, reissue, and other patents are not available on this site (so far as I've been able to determine). Other countries have a specific two-letter code as well: GB for Britain, DE for Germany, etc. Patents download using a variation of Adobe Acrobat instead of TIFF, so your computer may already be ready to receive facsimile copies from this site. However, as with the USPTO site, only one page at a time will download. Here is the Espacenet site:

http://gb.espacenet.com/espacenet/gb/en/search5.htm?AutoFill

Note that the "applicant" on the Espacenet site may be abbreviated, so it pays to try different versions of company names. For example, General Motors is usually abbreviated by the search software as "GEN MOTORS". If you key "GENERAL MOTORS" or simply "GENERAL" as I originally did, you might not find anything!

To find the European classification number for an item to search that way, see the European patent office website at

http://www.european-patent-office.org

You can also search and view, but not print, patents from this site. Some newer European patents must be downloaded from commercial sites that require payment; I ran into this myself with a few recent German examples that were unavailable to view from Espacenet.com or European-patent-office.org.

It is interesting to see how the US patent format has evolved over the years. Since about 1970 the format has been for the first page to give the title, inventor(s), assignee(s), and summary, with the second and subsequent pages as necessary giving the necessary drawings, followed by the pages listing the specific claims the patent makes. Before 1970 the drawings came first. Many European patents give all the text first and the drawings last.

To sum up:
Use the USPTO site for (1) searching US patents since January 1976; (2) viewing facsimlies of all US patents, especially before 1920.
Use the Espacenet site for (1) searching and viewing US patents since 1920; (2) searching and viewing European patents, also since 1920.

Now then. You may have heard of the Fish carburetor from oldtimers. Supposedly a conspiracy kept this reputedly energy-saving device off the market and off US cars. Well, here are the American patents! 1,983,660; 2,214,273; 2,236,595; 2,801,086 (this last issued in 1957). Judge them for yourself. If you use the Espacenet site, don't forget to put "US" before the numbers and leave the commas out.

There is a design patent for the whole body of the third-generation Mazda RX-7. Let's see if any of you BITOG dudes can find it. To help, key "Mazda" as assignee and "Automobile" as the title, and check various years around 1992. Have fun.

Hope this helps a few of you.
 
Thanks, MolaKule. I should probably point out that I am not trying to give legal advice, and if you have specific questions of a legal nature about patents or the patent process, you should see an attorney who specializes in this field.

In case you thought that fewer inventions are being patented, here's evidence to the contrary. Here are the years of issue for patents with an even million number:

Patent No. 1: 1836
1,000,000: 1911; time span 75 years
2,000,000: 1935; time span 24 years
3,000,000: 1961; time span 26 years
4,000,000: 1976; time span 15 years
5,000,000: 1991; time span 15 years
6,000,000: 1999; time span 8 years
7,000,000: 2006 (my projection); time span 7 years

Approximate numbers of patents issued/allocated in specific years:
1840: less than 500
1850: 1,000
1863: 4,000 (US Civil War era)
1875: 14,000
1900: 26,000
1917: 42,000 (World War I era)
1925: 50,000
1943: 33,000 (World War II era)
1950: 46,000
1975: 75,000
1990: 98,000
2000: 176,000
2003: 173,000

The numbers don't lie. Patent issuance has exploded in recent years. The efforts of the USPTO are downright amazing, don't you think?
 
quote:

Originally posted by ekrampitzjr:
The numbers don't lie. Patent issuance has exploded in recent years. The efforts of the USPTO are downright amazing, don't you think?

It is amazing, but before we get too excited, consider that nowadays you can get a patent granted for One-Click-Ordering (amazon.com) and other similarly silly stuff.

This is my favorite patent site
grin.gif


Patently Absurd


Here is a super patent, if you combine it with a portable refridgerator:

Headgear
 
I'm confused with how drug companies can get patents on DNA sequences in general, and "medical treatments targetting these sequences" in particular.

They didn't invent DNA, nor write that piece of code, and in many cases don't even have a drug or treatment to target that code, but want to grab it anyway.

All I can see is lots of lawyers getting rich over it.
 
Quick clarification of a couple of statements in my original post:

Under the definition of the term inventor, I said, "The last name is all that is required." That was meant in reference to searching. Of course, the full name appears in the patent, and if the last name is especially common, you will want to include a first name if you are using common keywords in other blanks.

In the paragraph beginning "When you think of a patent . . .", I said that the two patent types of most interest to fellow BITOG members would be the Design and Reissue. This was meant to be in addition to the normal utility patent series. If you get into serious patent research involving automotive issues, virtually all of the patents you will check will be of the normal utility series with just a serial number.

Shannow, I believe that the DNA sequences being patented do not occur in nature. Patenting them is analogous to copyrighting software. Pharmaceutical patents have had slightly different rules in the past anyway.

No one seems to have taken my challenge so far, so here's the answer. The third-generation Mazda RX-7 body styling is covered under US design patent D341,339 of 16 November 1993. The stylist was Yoichi Sato of Mazda, and he filed for the patent in 1991.

By the way, looking at the trademarks can be interesting in its own right. If you look at the trademark portion of the USPTO website, you will find that Mazda has trademarked the names RX-9 and RX-10 as well as RX-1 (which was never used on a production car in the '70s when the RX-2, etc., came out). Of course, these imply that future Mazdas might use these model names. It also appears that the RX-3 trademark has been renewed, since it is listed as "live" with a recent application date, and I've heard rumors that Mazda might bring back the name on some rotary-powered car. Also, a pharmaceutical company had trademarked the name Renesis for a drug but gave up the trademark before Mazda applied for it for the RX-8 engine.
 
ekrampitzjr,
looks like they are trying to patent actual DNA sequences found in nature.

I've no problem with Monsanto patenting a process, or a specific location to insert the peanut gene into other plants to make them "roundupready".

Just not fussed on patents to block others from curing disease.

http://www.tecsoc.org/biotech/focuspatents.htm
 
Keep in mind, there's also something called a trade secret. This is how those fantastic 'inventions' (you know, the 200MPG carburator) are kept from the public
grin.gif


Dave

I normally don't subscribe to these conspiracy theories. But there's one that's had me searching for years. The product was named 'starlight' or SOMETHING like that by it's inventor. It's a nearly perfect insulating material and would revolutionize the energy and transportation industries. Anyone else hear of it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom