Patents are supposed to be a non obvious extension of the prior art. I'm
not sure how patent examiners decide to award patents, but non-obvious is
never a requirement, and extension often isn't.
You can use these arguments in court, if you've the bankroll for an
expensive court fight. The whole system has completely broken.
On Sat, Mar 7, 2020 at 5:28 PM David Gregory <david.c.gregory@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
This is an awarded patent right? I think maybe the examiner didn’t do
their job so well.
On Mar 7, 2020, at 2:23 PM, Henry Vanderbilt <hvanderbilt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
After a quick scan through, it reminds me of the attempt to patent the
blinking cursor.
There might be some genuinely novel details in there, mind, but they
weren't obvious to a quick scan. LOTS of stuff that's been routine since
forever folded in there.
Can't blame 'em for trying, I suppose...
On 3/7/2020 2:14 PM, Ben Brockert wrote:
Interesting diagrams, surprisingly weak claims.
https://patents.google.com/patent/US10527003B1/en