Posted on 06/08/2007 10:48:42 PM PDT by gpapa
Paging U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab: Please call us on your cell phone. And better do it fast because cell phones may soon be harder to come by thanks to one of the dumber rulings ever by the U.S. International Trade Commission.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
Patents per se are an important part of a civilized society, one of the essential bureaucracies even of a free-market society.
As with many things in America, lawyers have screwed this one up. Too many patents issued for too much minutiae; conversely, preposterous ‘concept patents’ on nebulous things. Too many companies/people intimidated by patent lawyers and not getting their day in court.
Not to mention you don’t actually have to build it to get the patent. That way you can sue (lawyers, again) when someone else figures out how to make it/make it work.
Yes, and trust in enforcement of the patent is also essential.
Henry Bessemer invented an ingenious process for producing bronze powder (used in "gold" paint). It was a very efficient method compared to the time-honored system of using manual labor to pound sheets of bronze into flakes.
In his autobiography Bessemer explained why he decided to keep the process secret instead of relying on a patent. He was concerned that a patent could easily be violated by duplicating his machinery in small colonies that do not respect English patents. Only the bronze powder would be imported and there would be no proof that it was produced using his method.
So Bessemer built a small factory to produce bronze powder and kept the full details of the process secret by compartmentalizing the different stages of the operation. The workers in the different rooms did not even see each other and would even enter the factory by different entrances.
It was an elaborate and probably expensive way to protect his idea but it worked for decades.
That sounds like an urban legend.
As the Kentucky Historical Society incoherently relates, in their description of the Kentucky Landmark, “Kelly Kettle” :
One of many kettles made in this area by William Kelly, used for making sugar down South. In 1851, Kelly discovered process, known as Bessemer, for manufacture of steel. An Englishman, Bessemer, obtained patents on same process in England 1855 and in U.S. 1856. Kelly filed priority claim, 1857. U.S. awarded patent to Kelly and later refused renewal to Bessemer.
... the thing is, Big Steel sided with Bessemer, so the law was on the losing side of history along with Kelly. I recall reading or hearing that Kelly claimed that Bessemer visited his furnace sites in disguise and stole his process, and that there is some basis for believing Kelly’s claim.
Everything you know is wrong! Dogs came from the stars! The Aztecs invented the vacation! The brain is not the boss! All I know is everything YOU know is WRONG!
Well, it may be an hysterical account of some sort of patent fight. It seems like it must have involved George Devol and/or Joseph Engelberger. They were American robotic pioneers, and Engelberger, at least, had a relationship with Japanese industry. Devol did have a famous patent, but I don’t find anything along the lines of the giant lawsuit I outlined. That doesn’t mean it didn’t happen!
Does anyone know who is manufacturing these chips? The company I work for does a lot of chip production for Qualcomm right here in the USA.
No Patents are government enforced ANTI theft of ideas.
Seriously wrong.
The patent office has turned into a total farce.
And that’s coming from someone who has a patent issued in my name...
The Founders disagreed with you.
I can’t “look it up”.
The USPTO doesn’t permit searches for [some guy, an American].
Interesting interpretation of the U. S. Constitution.
Patents are granted to guarantee exclusivity for a 20 year period. Without these protections a company would not invest tons of cash designing and developing anything. My company for instance spent 8 million dollars to develop a product that can be mass produced very cheaply. We have to recoup the investment. If another company buys a copy of my product and copies it, they can then make and sell it for less than me, because they haven’t spent the 8 million bucks that needs to be earned back. Without these protections there is no incentive to invent. Patents are a double edged sword. They give protection but at the same time the entire process for making the device must be fully explained and detailed in a document that is readily available for anyone to read.
I don't know of this case, but there was the very famous case of George Selden, a lawyer who patented the idea of the automobile and collected royalties from actual automobile makers until Henry Ford finally won in the courts.
International patents trump US patents, I was told.
I had to jump through hoops, and cross more T’s and dot more I’s than you can imagine.
This doesn't sound like an example of the patent process I’ve been through.
There was a guy named Seldon who caused a lot of problems for carmakers in the early 20th century, and he never produced a single car.
“Patents are government-enforced theft. They should not exist.”
I wonder if you’d be saying that if you were a patent holder?
Patents are a way to reward innovative and creative work.
Without them many companies simply wouldn’t take the financial risks of doing the basic R&D necessary to innovate.
Sir Henry Bessemer F.R.S an autobiography
http://www.history.rochester.edu/ehp-book/shb/start.htm
A good read and the bronze powder chapter was the best.
Obviously, you have never had an inventive, creative idea — much less be holder of one or more patents. Sour grapes?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.