Slashdot Log In
Lawyer Sues To Get a Patent On Marketing
Posted by
kdawson
on Tue Mar 10, 2009 07:07 AM
from the series-of-gears dept.
from the series-of-gears dept.
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "Lawyer Scott Harris, one of the inventors of the concept of a 'marketing company devoted to selling/marketing products produced by other companies in return for a share of their profits,' is appealing the USPTO's rejection of US Patent Application No. 09/387,823 which was intended to patent that 'invention.' This court action is important because it directly challenges the In Re Bilski ruling, which tightened the rules to get rid of most so-called 'business method' patents. One of Mr. Harris's legal theories is that a 'company is a physical thing, and as such analogous to a machine.' If the name seems familiar, it's because Mr. Harris has a long history of inventive legal maneuverings. I'm honestly surprised that SCO never tried to hire or sue him."
Related Stories
Submission: Lawyer Sues to Get Patent on Marketing Paradigm by Anonymous Coward
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
The Future is Almost Here (Score:5, Interesting)
I can see a point where the United States becomes a lawsuit-based economy: instead of producing actual stuff, we'll all just patent stuff like email on a cell phone (who would have thought of that otherwise?).
The lawyers will obviously need to eat and get haircuts, so the money will eventually trickle down into the hands of the middle class.
I'm a genius - off to the patent office to patent this idea! I can't wait for my first royalty check.
becomes? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
In almost every other case I would be against this (Score:2)
<disclaimer>I have not read TFA, only the title.</disclaimer>
<humor>
Think of the implications if marketing is patented... LESS MARKETING, at least for a while. I, for one, like it.
</humor>
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
One of Mr. Harris's legal theories is that a 'company is a physical thing, and as such analogous to a machine.'
I thought the legal representation of a company was as a legal entity comparable to an individual for tax and other purposes. Then, his argument breaks down because he'd be implying that individuals are analogous to machines...
Re: (Score:2)
Ohhhh! I'll patent sending unsolicited emails! I'll make millions! Or I'll end Spamming. Either way, it's win-win!
Re: (Score:2)
That hasn't stopped people in the past
Re:The Future is Almost Here (Score:4, Interesting)
Take a look at this article in the Linux Journal [linuxjournal.com]
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
I'm a genius - off to the patent office to patent this idea! I can't wait for my first royalty check.
In related news, Boies, Schiller, LLP, have filed a lawsuit on behalf of The SCO Group against dsginter, who is the assignee listed on a recent patent application for a lawsuit-based business.
Re: (Score:2)
they can try, but rambus has got prior art on that.
Re:The Future is Almost Here (Score:5, Insightful)
The lawyers will obviously need to eat and get haircuts....
Lawyers don't eat food, they consume the souls of their clients and their hair doesn't grow because their dead.
Parent
Re:The Future is Almost Here (Score:5, Funny)
Never. Their too busy trying to make there mark here and they're.
Sorry, just couldn't resist. Do you realise how difficult that was to type for someone with a traditional education (get it right or say hello to my friend Mr. Board Rubber)? I had to erect a fort first, just in case of flying educational supplies ;o)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, just couldn't resist.
You don't have to apologize, you're a dry cleaner, and it's 3am. It would be ridiculous for me to expect you to be open.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I can see a point where the United States becomes a lawsuit-based economy: instead of producing actual stuff, we'll all just patent stuff like email on a cell phone (who would have thought of that otherwise?).
The tv show Sliders was a flop, let's not rehash one of their episode starters.
Re:The Future is Almost Here (Score:5, Funny)
I defend the right to bare arms and resolve conflicts like this in duels.
Easy there, I am also a fan of short sleeved shirts, but I'm not sure this is appropriate or traditional attire for a duel.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
I can see a point where the United States becomes a lawsuit-based economy
Easy, clean and permanent. Lawsuit my ass, duels are the new problem solver. If it worked for guys like eastwood, bronson or ledger
Couldn't have picked some real duels, could you? You know, like Hamilton vs Burr, Jackson vs Dickinson, or Lincoln vs Shields.
Re: (Score:2)
Lincoln vs Booth was another classic. Too bad Lincoln brought a knife to a gun fight.
Not much of a duel. Lincoln didn't bring anything to that "fight".
I think this would be more akin to the screaming fan-girl getting a backstage pass to Hannah Montana, and Miley unexpectedly shoots her #1 fan.
Actually, lost on appeal and bilksi upheld (Score:5, Informative)
Another one bites the dust! (Score:5, Insightful)
IOW, since the court upheld in Re Bilski, this is another nail in the coffin for business patents.
What I'm waiting on is: What does this mean for software patents? I guess we're about to find out in the Microsoft v. TomTom case. I'm sure we all wait with bated breath.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I'm waiting with baited breath; currently standing on the Redmond campus front lawn, wiggling a minnow between my teeth.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What, one can't have a hoard of monsters? I like to collect them. Getting them into chests and the like is a real bitch, though.
Re:Actually, lost on appeal and bilksi upheld (Score:5, Funny)
I'm telling you, the Take a Shot Every Time kdawson Posts Bullshit Drinking Game is the #1 contributor to cirrhosis of the liver.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
This sucks. I was hoping we were finally going to get rid of marketing.
does that mean (Score:3, Funny)
Re:does that mean (Score:4, Funny)
Just claim you patented lying and start extorting all the other liars.
Parent
Re:does that mean (Score:5, Funny)
It's that kind of thinking that built this great land.
Parent
Wait... (Score:5, Funny)
Marketing company devoted to selling/marketing products produced by other companies in return for a share of their profits.
...Stores?!?
Re:Wait... (Score:4, Insightful)
He appears to be trying to patent the concept of a marketing company or more specifically a software marketing company .... I suspect these already exist and have done for some time ....
Prior art is every software marketing company in existence ...forget if it can be patented due to it being a process, it has been around so long and is so obvious it cannot be patented
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
He appears to be trying to patent the concept of a marketing company or more specifically a software marketing company .... I suspect these already exist and have done for some time ....
Prior art is every software marketing company in existence ...forget if it can be patented due to it being a process, it has been around so long and is so obvious it cannot be patented
Irrelevant. Section 101 rejections come before 102 or 103 considerations.
not a machine (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
His argument that a company is a physical thing analogous to a machine is flawed. In our legal system, a company is a "non-natural person", so what he's trying to do is to patent a person, and that's a definite no-no.
Your argument is flawed (so is the mod points you were given).
If you are saying you can't patent a company because you can't patent a person you are then saying you can't own a company because you can't own a person. That is the same argument.
Companies are considered non-natural person's for the purposes of taxations. You tax a company like a person is taxed (thought at a different rate). Companies have their own SS# (known as an EIN number ##-#######). After that the similarities between a company
Re: (Score:2)
You can show the world you, as can I. Show me the "Microsoft" or any other corporation, and your arguments will hold water. No, BillG or SteveB don't count, nor do the things a corporation might actually produce, nor do the employees that work for the corporation, or any assets that are owned by the corporation. The Microsoft Campus is not "Microsoft", nor is the shipping center they had in the Canyon Park Business Center, or any other place like that. A corporation is a virtual entity. Ownership of a corpo
Re: (Score:2)
so is the mod points you were given
I cringed and nearly cried when I read that...
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, you've just touched upon an argument I plan to take to the Supreme Court as a class action on behalf of all corporations, that their inalienable rights under the Equal Protection clause are being violated. Corporations are denied the right to vote, to attend the school of their choice, to enlist in the armed services, to hold elective office, to adopt children, to marry the person (natural or otherwise) of their choice, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, it's even worse than that. A company is not even a "physical person" or physical-anything like the patent applicant wants to argue. A company is simply a legally-recognized *relationship* between physical things and people, not a physical object itself, which are what patents are intended to cover configurations of.
Incidentally, this is the source of another confusion. While the stuff you own might be physical, the legal rights you have in that stuff are not physical; just like a company, they
We should really be asking: (Score:2)
Re:We should really be asking: (Score:5, Insightful)
Does this man really have the time and money to waste on something pointless like this?
He's a lawyer. You do the math.
Parent
Marketing stunt. (Score:3, Interesting)
Then again, he may actually want the patent so he can hire other lawyers to sue on his behalf so that then, he can sit home, watch his DVD collection of Boston Legal, sip Scotch, and wish that he was hooked up with such hot women as Alan Shore has.
companies are like snowflakes (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
any reference to Microsoft in this post is purely coincidental...
Bullshit (Score:4, Insightful)
"A machine is any device that uses energy to perform some activity. In common usage, the meaning is that of a device having parts that perform or assist in performing any type of work." Neither a technical nor a vernacular understanding of machinery supports his argument. Only in the twisted logic common to LawyerLandtm could this ever be considered a machine. Lawyers ought to be disbarred for this behavior, as only someone who has an incredibly dishonest character could torture a definition like this.
Prior art? Record companies... (Score:3, Insightful)
"Marketing company devoted to selling/marketing products produced by other companies in return for a share of their profits" sounds like what record companies have been doing for almost a century?
Prior art? How about marketing companies? (Score:2)
Who needs to fish for examples.. marketing companies have existed for a long time.
A patent on retail?! (Score:2)
Doesn't every single retail store sell products produced by other companies in return for their profits?! The fact that anyone could even think this nonsense could be patented shows how screwed up our patent system is.
SCO (Score:2)
... should sue him for violating their patent of suing people for violating their patents.
Patent Application (Score:3, Funny)
A Process for Obtaining Legal Ownership of Certain Intellectual Property
ABSTRACT
An application is submitted to a government run office which oversees the process of granting and protecting intellectual property rights. Applications contain explanations of methods, design, and applications for said creations, and are often accompanied by diagrams and figures representing the proposed creation for which the applicant ("the Owner") will seek to obtain exclusive rights to create or sell. Once such rights are granted, any facsimile or copy produced by anyone other than the Owner, without express permission of the Owner, will been deemed a forgery and they will be prosecuted pursuant to U.S. intellectual property laws. The following rules shall be applied to any application under consideration:
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
None. I thought of it first and no one else had ever even conceived of such an invention. Take my word for it, no research necessary. Don't even bother Google'ing it.
DESCRIPTION OF PRIOR ART
Not that this is at all relevant, but see the previous section.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
Uselessly over-abused process of rewarding those who deserve it the least and providing consistent unfair advantages to those who will hinder progress where progress is often needed the most.
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY-
Patent Application No. 7,512,440
GRANTED 3/10/2009
Summary Wrong, Title Wrong (Score:3, Insightful)
Typical. kdawson hasn't a clue about Intellectual Property issues, yet posts constantly and inaccurately about them.
Firstly, the lawyer did not "sue" to get a patent. The application was (appropriately) rejected by the patent examiner. The applicant appealed the rejection to the PTO Board of Appeals and the rejection was upheld. The applicant then appealed that rejection to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC), which applied Bilski to uphold the rejection again. Despite the fact that a court was involved, this was not a "lawsuit."
Rather than appealling to the CAFC, the applicant could have filed a civil action against the Commissioner of Patents in the DC Circuit Court. This would be considered a lawsuit.
The only story here should be that the Patent system worked.
And please, please, STOP posting articles with headlines announcing that somebody "won" a patent. Patents are issued or allowed.
Re: (Score:2)
flamebait???
My patent (Score:3, Funny)
I have been granted a patent on staying home from work and hitting the bong.
To the office with all of you!
Invalidated due to Prior Art (Score:2)
Namely, just about every lawyer in existence...