Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.org.eff.talk:9580 misc.int-property:655 comp.unix.bsd:7018 Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!caen!nic.umass.edu!m2c!jjmhome!smds!rh From: rh@smds.com (Richard Harter) Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,misc.int-property,alt.suit.att-bsdi,comp.unix.bsd Subject: Re: Patents: What they are. What they aren't. Other factors. Message-ID: <1992Oct24.065933.3486@smds.com> Date: 24 Oct 92 06:59:33 GMT References: <id.X18U.D6J@ferranti.com> <1992Oct20.201929.3183@fcom.cc.utah.edu> <id.R3AU.4ZF@ferranti.com> <1992Oct23.204711.17987@fcom.cc.utah.edu> Reply-To: rh@ishmael.UUCP (Richard Harter) Organization: Software Maintenance & Development Systems, Inc. Lines: 23 In article <1992Oct23.204711.17987@fcom.cc.utah.edu> terry@cs.weber.edu (A Wizard of Earth C) writes: >>About 6 months ago, when I assembled the kids' swing set. It had a built >>in lock nut and a nylon bearing. I'm pretty sure that technology itself >>(integral nylon bearings) is fairly new... >This is not new; a combination of existing technologies isn't patentable. >Perhaps I should have asked "when was the las time you saw a new patentable >design for a sheet metal screw?". It may or may not be, depending on whether it is "obvious to a skilled practioner in the art". Who decides what is obvious to a skilled practioner in the art? In order, the patent examiner, the court of appeals, and the supreme court. For the purposes of patent law the sumpreme court is divided into two groups, the infallible five and the furious four. The composition of the two groups varies from case to case. The criteria that the infallible five uses are an example of applied chaos theory. -- Richard Harter: SMDS Inc. Net address: rh@smds.com Phone: 508-369-7398 US Mail: SMDS Inc., PO Box 555, Concord MA 01742. Fax: 508-369-8272 In the fields of Hell where the grass grows high Are the graves of dreams allowed to die.