Patent Granted on Sideways Swinging 508
Matt Van Gundy writes "In another brilliant move by the well loved U.S. Patent and Trademark Office a patent (6,368,227) has been granted to a Mr. Steven Olson for inventing the method of swinging sideways on a swing. The patent even lays claim to "inducing a component of forward and back motion into the swinging motion, resulting in a swinging path that is generally shaped as an oval." I claim prior art, but perhaps I am one of the few fortunate ones who enjoyed this method of swinging long before its 'invention' by Mr. Steven Olson. " My favorite line from the patent : "The user may even choose to produce a Tarzan-type yell while swinging in the manner described, which more
accurately replicates swinging on vines in a dense jungle forest. Actual jungle forestry is not required."
Re:Do we need any more proof (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:This is great! (Score:2, Interesting)
Yeah, "almost". You just disproved yo OWN point.
And what makes you think that the USPTO don't know that someone was tryin to clown when they submitted this swing $hit. Ain't nothin say you can't submit a joke patent. If you want to waste yo time and money I guess they don't care. There job is to make sure that yo followed protocol and didn't infringe on an idea that someone else submitted or that everyone don't already know about and that's all. If someone else want's to waste they time and money havin it struck down, that's cool too.
That's how these gubmint offices be workin. They take on as much B$ as possible and spend all the money they be gettin, so they can justify a bigger budget when the next year come up.
Re:April Fool's is long past (Score:3, Interesting)
Job of patent office is not to judge (Score:1, Interesting)
patent office is not to judge patents, its just
to grant them and to make sure it is a 'new'
patent (ie. it doesnt exist in the patent-DB).
To enforce such a patent, that's an entirely
different matter. (your swings are using my
patented motion?)
Patent holder's father is patent attorney (Score:3, Interesting)
The NPR story mentioned that the patent holder's father is a patent attorney. (The patent holder is a 10-12 year old boy.) There was no suggestion that the patent was filed to raise awareness of problems with patent law, but I can't help but think that's the case.
Write your Congressperson (Score:2, Interesting)
Rep. Morella:
I am writing today with further concern of regarding the U.S. Patent Office. The U.S. Patent Office and its antiquated practices are working against the very purpose it was created for, furthering American innovation and invention. Instead, in recent years, it has shown that it cannot keep up with the rapidly growing pace of technology and has not been applying proper standards to evaluating prior art. There have been several cases over the past five years where patents that are harmful to my industry, the Internet, and the technology industry have been granted. These patents, which have ample prior art, only induce frivolous lawsuits and draw my industry into the quagmire of costly legal debate, not to protect the rights of inventors, but to further corporate coffers.
The reason that I write today is because a frivolous, non-technology patent was granted on April 9th. Patent 6,368,227 was granted for "Method of swinging on a swing", and describes a method in which a person swinging on a playground swing could swing sideways. This patent is the best indicator that the U.S. Patent Office needs serious review.
I call upon you to investigate this matter further, and if the investigation warrants, bring this topic up for debate within the House of Representatives. It is time that we begin to fix those areas of Government that are not performing their prescribed duty and return them to working for the people again.
Re:Wrong topic. (Score:2, Interesting)
In fact, this idea seems to be borne out by the following web research. I found this conference [ipo.org] webpage. (Do a page search for "Peter L. Olson") It seems our boy works for 3M in St Paul, MN and is indeed invloved in patent law. I can't be positive it's the same dude, but it seems likely.
Some links to this guy. (Score:2, Interesting)
http://www.micropat.com/og/ogn980210/patrequ.ht
He is again listed as attorney for 3M on adjudication of certain patent.
professional negligence? (Score:2, Interesting)
I never got the patent law information but from my little inquiry, my limited understanding leads me to believe that this is a perfect case for negligence per se, which is when you don't actually have to prove negligence, it is just understood that the act is so blatantly negligent that you don't have to argue why the reasonable professional would not have performed said act (like amputating the wrong leg). However as somone else posted, it is possible the rules and restrictions of patent law protect the patent examiner in this case, and I am not sure who would be the appropriate party to bring a suit against this guy, but I would love to see someone try.
"Gift" for his son? (Score:2, Interesting)
From the last paragraph of the patent it states "the present invention may be referred to by the present inventor and his sister as "Tarzan" swinging."
I'm going to guess that Peter Olson is dad and he gave his son, Steven, a gift of his very own patent. A pretty cool hack of the patent system if you ask me. Also goes to show how screwed up the system is.
A little poking at Mapquest and you can get a good aerial view the tree that inspired the patent as well.