USPTO Unable to Find Top Ten Patent Holders 321
lelitsch writes "So a journalist tries to interview the top ten patent holders in the US. As he finds out, neither the USPTO, nor the patent processing companies are able to identify them. Even more surprisingly, "America's greatest inventor is apparently an obscure guy in Japan who makes stuff most people can't comprehend. And the nation's greatest native inventor seems to be a man who has come up with 100 different ways to make a flower pot.""
Yes (Score:5, Funny)
FP!
Re:Yes (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Yes (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Yes (Score:5, Informative)
So interestingly enough one of my patents has just received its notice of allowability. On its first pass through though the patent office put up quite a few objections and rejections to our claims. After we went over them we found that about 20% were basically due to vague language on our part. The remaining 80% were flagged by the USPTO as already claimed, though in reality they were not related at all, and once we pointed this out the USPTO agreed and dropped their objections.
So I would have to say that my patent is now a much stronger one thanks to the feedback from the USPTO, and I was impressed by how wide of a net they cast in looking for precedent. Now of course I'm a hardware engineer, so perhaps they are stronger in this area. But in this one case I feel they did a good job.
- AC cause my legal team wouldn't even want me to say this much - Lawyers sheesh...
Re:Yes (Score:4, Interesting)
The Patent people that I dealt with were -very- competant and -very- effective. It's a shame that the tiniest fraction of mostly trivial stuff gets 99% of the press.. I guess that's life.
Re:Yes (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Yes (Score:2)
perfection? no. but when crapola like perpetual motion machines keep getting patented over and over and over, it shows how busted the system is (or how retarded the examiners are). imo any examiner stupid enough to pass a perpetual motion machine should be sent to take mandatory grade school physics lessons, before being allowed to touch any patents ever again.
Re:Yes (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Yes (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Yes (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Yes (Score:5, Interesting)
It does look like the text is from elsewhere. I skipped through the text of the patent, just to see if it is all solid ramblings, and spotted the below in the section titled "DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS"
Aware of its existence, the android perceives and changes the same reality of human corporal experience, including the reality of the cosmos. This book, an introduction to the theory and science of androids, is intended to acquaint the reader with this new technological finding and to mark the beginning of an androidal age in which sentient machines alter the human universe.[My emphasis]
So it looks to me like this patent wasn't even fully read before being granted, though it looks to be about 12000 words!
Re:Yes (Score:2)
Maybe someone needs to fine patents for "method of finding patent holders" or "method of ranking patent holders"...
Re:Yes (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Yes (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Yes (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Yes (Score:3, Funny)
Local zoo... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Local zoo... (Score:3, Funny)
(blank stare)
Your local zoo has an infinite number of monkeys?
Can I see?
Re:Local zoo... (Score:5, Funny)
generally, you can recreate Hamlet in about 3 months with a team of 10 monkeys working 8 hours a day.
Re:Local zoo... (Score:4, Insightful)
See also: Slashdot, blogs, Google.
Re:Local zoo... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Local zoo... (Score:4, Funny)
Yup.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/ [whitehouse.gov]
Re:Local zoo... (Score:2)
Same name problem (Score:5, Interesting)
Kind of like the Nobel prize a couple years ago where there were a bunch of people with the same name in the research department of the winner in Japan.
For those that didn't read the article, USPTO is bad and grants too many broad patents to obvious and common things.
Re:Same name problem (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Same name problem (Score:2)
Do you mean "...it's bad because..." ?
Re:Same name problem (Score:2)
Some Database (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Some Database (Score:5, Funny)
Well, you see, I patented both of those ideas already and am refusing to let the patent office use them
Re:Some Database (Score:2)
Re:Some Database (Score:2)
That was BAD.
Re:Some Database (Score:2)
The quality of their prior art research suddenly becomes more understandable.
Re:Some Database (Score:3, Insightful)
so sad... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:so sad... (Score:3, Interesting)
Wikipedia's article on Ron Popeil [wikipedia.org]
does anyone else find it fascinating... (Score:3, Interesting)
to wit:
"And the nation's greatest native inventor seems to be a man who has come up with 100 different ways to make a flower pot."
the nation's greatest inventor, in my mind, would be the inventor that has most positively impacted society at large with their inventions, etc, etc. basically, a totally subjective unit-of-measure unless we find some nice way of ranking the value of a given patent to society...
it's just curious how often this happens....
(large houses over well constructed houses, etc, etc, etc).
enjoy.
Peter
Re:does anyone else find it fascinating... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:does anyone else find it fascinating... (Score:2)
i suppose that in my pre-conceived view of the world, eastern cultures don't have quite as much rampant greed in open circulation, but then again, having only anecdotal evidence, i could be wrong....
we certainly do seem to "win" that
Re:does anyone else find it fascinating... (Score:2, Insightful)
I've heard anecdotes about SE Asian sweatshops and Chinese factories. (Not to mention houses of "work" of another type in Thailand). Point is, greed is everywhere - it's not part of Eastern or Western culture. It's part of *human* culture. All that's needed is the opportunity to express it.
Now, to take the Ayn
Re:does anyone else find it fascinating... (Score:2)
would those sweat shops have existed if there hadn't been someone constantly wanting the products they were putting out at fantastically low prices? probably, but i'd like to think that in a more stable economy (i.e. one not in the middle of economic war for mere survival), they might not have.
on a similar note: have you ever read this book?
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0871564378/102-26 73450-3603322?st=*&v=glance&n=283155 [amazon.com]
this is an absolutely superb book that tries to quant
Re:does anyone else find it fascinating... (Score:2)
Of course now that people have less and less to say on the way they work in the west, they may make a comeback while the east does its own social revolution.
Re:does anyone else find it fascinating... (Score:2)
Well, we have this program here, which is called 'Peking Express'. It is a game where several couples have to make a journey in Asia with as little means as possible.
Last year, they had to get from Peking to the mouth of the Indus.
While in China, they had it relatively easy, people liked to help them for nothing. However, once in India, they had the hardest time, people wouldn't do anything for them without pay.
I think there is not much homogenity on this in Eastern cultures, as it spans from about Russi
Re:does anyone else find it fascinating... (Score:3, Informative)
Does anyone else find it fascinating/depressing when people can't spot obvious humor?
Re:does anyone else find it fascinating... (Score:2)
my point is, ignoring this particular article, (notice i never said anything specifically criticising what THE AUTHOR SAID, as it was obviously rhetoric) how many cases can you think of in the recent past where someone DOES rank things in just this manner?
said another way: doesn't it just annoy you when people don't get that you got it, and were, instead, commenting on the sad state of affairs that would allow this guy to use this technique to make his point, because it's in such common
Re:does anyone else find it fascinating... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:does anyone else find it fascinating... (Score:2)
i really didn't expect everyone to think that i took it as anything other than rhetoric, i suppose i must point that out in big bold letters next time. how can any reader of slashdot not get the real point of this article with as much anti-USPTO sentiment that permeates the air here?
so, again, yes, i got it.
the point i was making was *totally* off-topic in observing: we tend to use the technique he uses a lot. he hit the nail on the head in using it precisely because it happens SO often that we aren'
Re:does anyone else find it fascinating... (Score:2)
It's the criteria used by governments, corporate lobbiests, advocates of making more things patentable. In all these cases quantity appears to matter far more than quality.
What's frightening about all this... (Score:5, Interesting)
I think it's especially terrifying in the computer world because it seems that many USPTO employees don't know what is standard practice and what is innovation. This article from Salon [salon.com] reviews some ridiculous patents and patent claims
Generally subjectivity plays a small role in governmental organizations (think about the IRS and all its coded forms). It seems that the USPTO is a strange organization in that sense. Does anyone know how the process works? To me it seems as if it's just reviewed by a bunch of people who may or may not understand what it is their awarding a patent to.
Re:What's frightening about all this... (Score:3, Interesting)
Whatever PTO examiners don't know about standard practice is dwarfed by what Slashdotters don't know about Patent Law.
First, as has been explaned numerous times before, each patent is reviewed by someone with training in that select field. For example, a patent for an LCD is reviewed by someone that has reviewed LCD patents, often for as long as LCDs have existed. It's quite common for these specialized examiners to be as adept in the field as any inventor working in that
Wrong (Score:3, Interesting)
Do you really believe this? I'm sorry, but it just doesn't ring true to anyone who has browsed through many of these patents and read their contents. The truth is, patent examiners are overworked, underpaid, and under incredible pressure (by those giving the USPTO money for applications) to grant patents. Sure, there is usually the few token rejections and rewrites, but anyone who has
but...but..... (Score:2, Funny)
Typical - the PTO doesn't care about the inventors (Score:4, Insightful)
The system needs to be recast to benefit the inventors and society, not the horrible corporate givaway currently being plotted in Congress under the guise of patent reform.
Re:Typical - the PTO doesn't care about the invent (Score:2)
Finally an issue for the masses. (Score:2)
"A database operator's nightmare" (Score:5, Funny)
Re:"A database operator's nightmare" (Score:2)
Hmmm...would you settle for:
I'm pretty sure you were joking, but I only sort of am -- that's what produced the list I posted a ways downthre
Re:"A database operator's nightmare" (Score:5, Insightful)
I know you're trying to be funny, but your suggestion would be inadequate.
There's no analogy to a "user_id" for issued patents. There's no requirement that an inventor record his name the same way (James Doe vs. Jim Doe) and there are more than a handful of foreign language inventors who change the English spelling over time. There's also the issue of joint inventorship. You invent a powerswitch that makes electric tools more efficient and file 3 applications: with Steve the electric drill inventor, with Tim the electric saw inventor, and with Bill the electric belt sander inventor. You also file an additional application with William (who happens to be Bill) for an electric rotary sander. You have invented one powerswitch, but your name shows up on 4 patent applications (with 3 different people). People get married, omit middle names, omit "Jr." and more.
And finally, seriously, who the feck cares who has the most inventions? Who really thinks the patent office needs to assemble a team? Get right on this? Grab this bull by the horns? It's hard to imagine a more frivolous outrage.
I know you were just cracking a joke, but eh. The patent office has a public search facility. Stop by if you're in Alexandria VA. I happen to be somewhat familiar with what they've got in their database and why it's not so simple to answer this question. If you want to know how many times a particular name appears on a patent it would be simple to produce, but that is not the same question as who has made the most inventions.
This is analogous to the difference between what the spec says and what the customer wants. You build the product to the spec but that wasn't what the customer wanted. I'd think that this should be a familiar concept on Slashdot, but suddenly everyone is so shocked by precisely the same phenomenon. Honestly I think the patent office should have just patronized the guy and told him whose name appears on the most patents. It wouldn't come remotely close to actually answering the question about who has the most inventions, but who the feck cares?
Re:Counting IS Important.... (Score:2)
They used to record it, but when they install the rubber stampinator 9000, that feature wasn't implemented. The work around is to sue everyone.
Re:Counting IS Important.... (Score:3, Insightful)
The patent office operates under a "good faith and candor" policy. They need to see a name and a signature. If you're committing fraud, it's your problem and the patent, if it issues, would be unenforceable. So it's up to you, Mr. James Theodore Doe, to prove that you are actually the Ted Doe identified in the pate
PATENT APPLICATION #1588003 (Score:5, Funny)
USPTO Does Bathos (Score:4, Funny)
bathos: bathos - a change from a serious subject to a disappointing one
It's great to see slapstick humour is thriving in the U.S.
In highschool myself and a few friends made a habit of getting together to watch comedic silent films. The films were available from libraries and the venerable National Film Board of Canada [www.nfb.ca].
Generally our favourites were Charlie Chaplin and Buster Keaton [imdb.com].
While I fear and loath (in the best intentioned way of the late H.S. Thomson) the policies of America as applied to IP, the USPTO has taken to mimicing Chaplin's indifferent giant machine crunching the common person in the truest, sadly comedic, bathotic fashion. Unfortunately I'm afraid act two has been foredone by Kafka.
"an obscure guy in Japan who makes stuff..." (Score:5, Funny)
"...most people can't comprehend."
You mean this stuff [methodshop.com]?
The (sort of) correct list. (Score:5, Informative)
So, I'm going to restrict the question a little bit. First of all, I'm only going to look at the primary inventor on any given patent. Second, I'm going to ignore the fact that not every name on earth uniquely identifies an individual person. Finally, for the sake of letting my computer get back to more important things like folding protiens, I'm only going to look at about the last 10 years worth of patents (and in fairness, I haven't updated my database for the last few months either, so it's possible the last couple might have changed since then -- and it's quite possible all of these numbers are now a bit higher). Finally, I'm restricting this to US Utility patents, not plant patents, design patents, etc.
Within those guidelines, the top 10 inventors and number of patents credited to each are:
Nicely enough, all of these names even look like ones that stand a reasonable possibility of being unique (among patenting inventors).
Re:The (sort of) correct list. (Score:2, Interesting)
431 Sandhu; Gurtej S., Boise ID
432 Forbes; Leonard, Corvallis OR
460 Focke; Heinz, Verden
470 Straeter; Joseph G., Highland IL
475 Gardner; Mark I., Cedar Creek TX
505 Farnworth; Warren M., Nampa ID
518 Akram; Salman, Boise I
Re:The (sort of) correct list. (Score:3, Informative)
In case you wanted to know what they did:
Shunpei Yamazaki: semiconductors and other things for displays like LCD
Donald E. Weder: flower pot guy
Kia Silverbrook: computers especially printing
Mark I. Gardner: semiconductors especially doping
Salman Akram: semiconductors - fabrication
Warren M. Farnworth: semiconductors again - fabrication
Ravi Kumar Arimilli: computers - especially memory access
Leonard Forbes: higher level semiconductors like eeprom nand gates, etc
Jay S. Walker: mostly games and lottery stuff ano
Public review period (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Public review period (Score:2)
USPTO should offer patents like grants (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:USPTO should offer patents like grants (Score:2)
Re:USPTO should offer patents like grants (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:USPTO should offer patents like grants (Score:2)
Patents bad for USA (Score:4, Insightful)
From TFA:
It doesn't seem unusual to have a foreigner holding so many patents. Of the top 10 living patent holders on the 1997 list, eight were from other countries. Six were Germans, and two were Japanese. The only two Americans were flower guy Weder and oil industry researcher Hartley Owen.
The point is that no matter how much royalities the USA gets from the rest of the world, the rest of the world is still 20 times bigger than the USA. I think when push comes to shove, the US insistence of coercing patents is a very evil idea and will one day come back to haunt us in a very painfull and violent way.
essay:A Violent Protest Against Patents [slashdot.org]
Good idea, Johnson! (Score:2)
Does anyone have a Mac?
Ugh. "Greatest" != "Most"! (Score:3, Insightful)
"Most prolific" is more accurate, but the article seems to use the two interchangably.
The hip thing to do... (Score:4, Insightful)
Let us assume that you started from that point on creating unique IDs for every individual, instead of the aforementioned problem a new one that previously existed is still there. A person can have a multitude of possible names. Say my name was James Robert Smith. What if I filed for patents using different forms of my name over time? James Robert, Jim Robert, Jim Bob (hey I had to pick a name with a funny variant), maybe just James or just Jim, or just Robert or Rob or Bob, how about J.R. or J.B., or Jim Rob, James Rob...I think you get my point. Not to mention my name might be VERY common. I doubt many people in the US could argue that Smith is an uncommon last name, the same goes for the name James or Robert. Now you have to determine if it is the same person.
On a printed patent your next means of division would be by city and state. Of course this does not take into account if our James Robert Smith moved around or if multiple James Robert Smith's exist in the same city and state. This is a rather complex search that is not as easy to perform as some individuals might have you believe. After all, it wasn't just the PTO who said we cannot do it, of course I shouldn't expect people to RTFA.
In defense of prior art search, these relatively simpler to perform. You would search for a general concept or a component of an item claimed in the patent. The primary database would include prior patents, patent publications, and patents from other countries. A vast majority of individuals around slashdot will often point out prior art that is outside these realms, and while individuals within the patent office will search outside as well, the ability to find prior art is much more limited without databases properly setup for accurate searching. Even if examiner X finds a reference to application Z through a Google search, they still have to then show that reference A was published or known before the filing date of application Z.
I could quite possibly spend all day trying to defend the PTO; however, it would most likely be a waste of my time. Instead of complaining the PTO does not do its job and constantly making what sound like personal attacks at the individuals who work there (without ever knowing who they are), file for a patent, work at the office, or litigate a patent as an attorney or agent (if you can get past that pesky exam) before you judge the job the individuals are doing. I think you will all find that the people working at the patent office work hard to ensure that the best quality they can produce goes into every patent application they work on and that these people deserve better then to have their intelligence or integrity questioned by people who do not fully understand how the system works (afterall the office quite possibly collects much more in fees for a longer prosecution then for a quick allowance).
The patent process will always get more complex (Score:3, Insightful)
Even if you reduced the number of years a patent is valid, you still need to record them forever, in case someone tries to patent them again.
The only thing that could stop the patent system from becoming more and more expensive, is that the techniques for searching through and reading the patents improve at a faster rate than the number of patents.
Otherwise, one of three things will happen:
1. The patent system will eventually become so expensive that only the extremely wealthy companies can patent things. This will typically mean the end of competition.
2. The patent office will just let more and more bogus patents through to be sorted out by the legal system. This will also mean the end of competition as the most wealthy companies can sue any competitor to the ground.
3. Someone in power sees the madness and dismantles the patent system.
Someone might say that 1. and 2. have both already happened.
Possible reason why a Japanese man is #1 (Score:3, Interesting)
It's possible that this guy is simply recording all those patents (which they mail out a CD biweekly) and applying for the same items in the US.
Re:RIM (Score:2)
Re:hmmm (Score:2)
Re:hmmm (Score:5, Informative)
IBM has been in first place for the last 12 years straight, is the only company ever to break 2,000 patents per year (in 2004 they got 3,277), and last year got about 2/3 more patents than the 2nd place finisher.
http://www.iptoday.com/pdf_current/Reports/Rprt_0
Re:hmmm (Score:2, Funny)
Re:hmmm (Score:3, Funny)
What does Microsoft have a lot of?
Re:hmmm (Score:2)
Very, very healthy roses?
totally OT (Score:2)
Re:hmmm (Score:4, Insightful)
Personally I'd be suprised it Microsoft made the top 100, they've not been around for as long as the heavyweights, and their field has been fairly limited until recently.
Re:hmmm (Score:2)
Re:hmmm (Score:2)
Re:hmmm (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:hmmm (Score:3, Informative)
What's with the last sentence? If he's looking for those with a large
Re:hmmm (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:U.S. of A. (Score:5, Insightful)
So South Korea and Kuwait could've won their freedom from oppressors on their own, and all the nations under Soviet control in eastern Europe (whose elected leaders all mysteriously died at the same time) were nice and happy? Taiwan and China could come to a peaceable understanding?
I agree with a lot of your criticisms about modern America, but I think your absolutist view of its involvement in the past half-century is a bit short-sighted. Its reputation isn't squeaky clean (ie, Lumumba in Congo), but there have been some genuine righteous triumphs as well.
Re:U.S. of A. (Score:2)
Re:U.S. of A. (Score:2)
Considering that you picked these three examples, I feel it's safe to assume that the rest of our interventions (hundreds over the last century) must have been quite misguided.
If you're really willing to make an assumption like that, then do I even need to point out the problem with your thinking?
All the parent poster was pointing out was the the U.S. isn't some completely evil institution that sows death and destruction around the world with every action that it takes. He needn't provide every case w
Re:U.S. of A. (Score:2)
Re:USPTO needs a serious fix. (Score:2)
78 is a pretty insignifigant number
to be included on a patent, you only have to be listed as an inventor, it doesn't mean you actually DID anything - but it gives you full rights to the patent.
Re:My New Patent (Score:2, Funny)
SELECT name, address, count(*) FROM patents HAVING count(*) > 1000 GROUP BY name, address;
Re:My New Patent (Score:2)
SELECT name, address, count(*) FROM patents HAVING count(*) > 1000 GROUP BY name, address;
But wait! Yours has flaws too!
SELECT applicant.name, applicant.address, count(*) AS count
FROM patents, applicant, applicantmap
WHERE patent.id=applicantmap.patent_id
AND applicantmap.applicant_id=applicant.id
GROUP BY applicant.name, applicant.address
ORDER BY count(*) DESC LIMIT 10;
How many patents are going to have just ONE name on them? Most have several, and the
Re:Poor guy (Score:2)
Neat story about a gun he owns from the revolutionary war that was passed down to him from his fore fathers. The British would stay out of rifle range and wave their hands over their head and jump up and down to get the colonists to shoot at them.
Don owns a long rifle like a "long tom" and one of his ancestors shot one of the British
Re:Flower pots (Score:2)