Delphion To Start Charging For Patent Access 113
adenied writes: "According to this Delphion is going to start charging for full access to their patent database starting June 1. The only thing that will be available will be U.S. bibliographic data. For those of you who don't remember, Delphion is the company that is running the old IBM patent server womplex.patent.ibm.com. This really sucks. Anyone know other free patent servers out there on the net?" Thanks to IBM, there has been amazing free access to these files for a while. But as a public office, it seems reasonable to me that the USPTO be required to make their patent files, well .. public, actually.
Ummm, USPTO Does Have Patent Records (Score:1)
They do indeed have patent records, in particular high quality tiff scans of nearly all of them accessible by patent records number.
The text searching is not complete, but much of serious patent research is done using the published patent record indexes anyway.
The USPTO has plenty to offer.
Re:public information (Score:1)
Hi Timothy,
I am the anonymous coward of the first post. You make some good points, though i do have my own reservations also:
1) When i say "everyone" has the right to peruse public information, i mean that The Opportunity Exists. I think you are saying that all citizens should have access to public information all the time. I agree in theory, however it is impractical to say the least. Certainly most public libraries are equipped with internet access, but what about those people who are living/on vacation hundreds of miles from a public library?
You cannot provide for everyone all the time, but you can make sure The Opportunity Exists. If it's public information, it has to be freely available, somehow, somewhere. A homeless person in San Diego probably wouldn't be inclined to walk to DC to find public information, but he is simply unfortunate.
(On a side note, i think the purpose of government is to ensure there aren't any homeless people who can't access public information - fix the cause, not the symptoms.)
2) I agree the internet is an ideal place to distribute this information. The "tech divide" is very real, though - age, poverty, intelligence, location - so even then you aren't going to get full coverage.
I personally would very much like all information to be online. Right now i do my white pages, yellow pages, bus timetables and train timetables online. It's wonderful. That said, i do not believe the government has an obligation to publish online. It's their choice - as long as there is still some method of access we're still doing alright.
Alison
Re:So how do I get it to work right? (Score:1)
that would violate my patent #5469332817 (Score:2)
I'd be forced to bring a lawsuit against anyone trying to infringe on my intellectual property.
Oh of course they'll be public (Score:1)
Of course, how else are they going to stop the little guys like us from catching big business with their pants around their ankles for putting patents out on things like multiplayer games [shacknews.com]. Fuckers. I mean, when society is heading toward freedom of information, what more do we need than a ministry of information. I know this isn't quite to that degree yet, but it's a start. Make it less accessable to the common man, and then they start making it harder and harder to get access, until finally, this "public" office has nothing for the public to worry about..... move along, nothing to see here.
</rant>
Sorry about that
Re:Failure is Better (Score:2)
Nope. Paid for by property taxes. Charged to the property owner - either you pay directly or if you rent it's part of your rent.
or broadcast TV
Not even close. Why do you think all those commercials are in there?
...phil
Re:Give me a break. (Score:2)
The patent office is self-supporting. Look it up.
Which happens to be one of the biggest flaws in the US patent system.
Re:Why should everything be free? (Score:5)
I think the money paid by those applying for patents more than recoups any costs associated with putting a patent database on-line.
I don't see how wanting the patent office to provide access to its files conflicts w/ Libertarian ideology. More likely the concept of patents itself conflicts. Libertarian writings tend to say that the reason for monopolies is that government creates them. This happens to be one of those ways.
Better than Failure (Score:3)
Re:Patents and Frequencies? (Score:1)
I don't know, existence in nature seems to be a pretty good example of prior art to me.
Honestly, I think that patenting random discoveries (genes and the like) is idiotic.
Think about this scenario: Random company discovers a gene somewhere that does something interesting and patents. Sometime later, a baby is born with this gene due to a natural mutation (assuming a mutation can ever be considered natural). Now what? The baby, which has the gene, is in violation of the random companies patent. Does this mean the parents have to pay license fees? If they can't afford to pay, what happens? Should they go to prison because their child happens to have this gene? The possible rammifications are staggering.
Anyway, the thought that a company can stumble over something and then claim that they actually did something important in finding it and deserve compensation for their efforts is absurd. Anyone can find something by accident, being first to find something that already exists in nature does not give you the right to own it.
USPTO and Public Patents (Score:5)
So reasonable that they've already done it. See www.uspto.gov [uspto.gov] for a searchable index.
Re:use pat2pdf to get pdf formatted patents (Score:1)
Or did you just make that up ?
USPTO _DOES_ make it public... (Score:2)
Re:I Have a Better Idea (Score:2)
Actually, a lot of pharmaceutical companies' "R&D" budgets goes toward maintenance research, not development of new drugs. A lot of the initial research they capitalize on is already done in a "socialist" manner: by tax-funded universities and federal agencies. In some cases companies help fund the research in exchange for the patent and commercialization rights; in others they're patenting and commercializing the implementation of the drug (so to speak). Nearly all of the most important vaccines of the 20th century came out of these "socialist" research facilities, not out of pharmaceutical companies.
It's also worth noting that drug companies are not exactly going out of business in Canada, where drug prices have arbitrary caps imposed by their socialized (gasp) insurance system. (Note that it isn't socialized medicine in the way most Americans picture it; doctors in Canada are still generally in private practice, and they're not hurting. They don't make as much as American counterparts, but they don't have the insanely high insurance rates their American counterparts do, either.)
Search fees (Score:1)
What's your classification, citizen?
Re:use pat2pdf to get pdf formatted patents (Score:3)
Now pay up.
Hi, I wrote pat2pdf (Score:1)
pat2pdf 1.01
ghostscript 6.0
libtiff 3.5.4
-
Freekin' Great (Score:2)
And a few about patenting breathing for old times sake.
Re:use pat2pdf to get pdf formatted patents (Score:1)
Re:Give me a break. (Score:1)
I'd expect free photocopies, if the marginal cost were 0.000001 cents per page. They are an informational agency. Web access to their database should be a basic part of their budget.
Re:Give me a break. (Score:3)
I agree completely. The USPTO was set up to grant inventors a limited monopoly in return for disclosing their invention. Who profits from the monopoly? Not me; not you; certainly not the taxpayer. Who then?
The patent holders!
So who is using the patent office?
The patent holders!
Who should pay to make their patents publicly available?
The patent owners!
Patents already work on a 'subscription' basis - you have to pay every so often to renew your patent, up to the limit of 20 years (IANAL - correct me if needed). my somewhat immodest proposal is this...
Make the patent office self-supporting. You and I get access to all the patents on the internet. The USPTo charges a variable fee every year to cover their costs. Any profits are returned to the patent holders (sort of like an income tax refund).
All in favor?
Re:Question? (Score:2)
Re:I Got a Better Idea (Score:2)
Sure would. It would cause a mass exodus of all technolgical development from the US to countries that do recognize patents.
Re:Delphion is for patent factories (Score:2)
To begin with most University libraries have the patent database on CD ROM available for full text searching and immediate printout.
If the entreprenuer is struggling to the point where he cannot afford $75 for one month access to Delpion, he isn't going to make it anyway.
Re:I Got a Better Idea (Score:2)
Yes, let's consider NASA. A giant pork-barrel for defense contractors. No stockholders. No profitability. No responsiveness whatsoever to market needs.
Consider also that innovation is already heavily funded by governments
After repealing patents ALL innovation will have to be funded by governments. Didn't the Soviet Union and Japan's MITI teach us a lesson about centrally planned economies?
Do a search on the net for DARPA funded projects and you'll get an idea of what I'm talking about.
My Dad was a senior DARPA project manager. He got to administer projects like the ceramic diesel engine. Give me a fscking break.
Re:I Got a Better Idea (Score:2)
I think it would be highly unlikely that all 160 countries that recognize patent rights would immediately follow the US down the toilet.
People would no longer be hampered by fascist laws and life saving drugs would suddenly be affordable to third world countries.
Third world countries don't have the infrastructure to deliver the drugs even if they were FREE. Look at the history of vacinations or control of common parisites in Africa. The UN not only has to supply the drugs free, but also supply the infrastructure to deliver them.
Also the best possible solutions to technological problems would be quickly adopted by all as opposed to people spending an incredible amount of effort trying to circumvent somebody else's patent and reinventing the wheel. What a waste!
People who spout this sort of nonsense have NO grasp of the history of technology in commerce. Prior to the establishment of patents in 18th century England innovation and dissemination of technological progress was greatly hampered by the need for inventors to keep their inventions secret to prevent their being copied. The result was machines in sealed boxes, guilds where the methods of manufacture were kept secret by draconian contract, and licenses or contracts prohibiting the reverse engineering of goods sold. Some historians even attribute the onset of the industrial revolution to the passage of patent laws. Talk about re-inventing the wheel - since there was no body of published technology (i.e. patents) anyone wanting to develop an invention had to do so from scratch since everything was kept secret.
Patents changed all that by establishment of a right to commercial exploitation for a limited period of time of an invention in exchange for full disclosure.
Re:Oh, yeah... (Score:2)
The DCMA covers copyrighted materials which is a completely different body of law.
Reverse engineering FOR THE PURPOSES OF EVADING COPY PROTECTION is the prohibition here. If you have some other use in mind, go ahead.
Re:I Got a Better Idea (Score:2)
Bingo. The steps backwards we are seeing are due to the fact that existing laws/institutions were and are not protecting copyright holders. Thus the only way they can protect themselves is with means very much less desirable to society as a whole. As/if conventional copyright/patent laws become unsatisfactory, creators of intellectual property will become less willing to make their work available in forms that these laws traditionally protected. The result we are seeing is a return to less freedom to the user and a decline in utility for these materials.
The history of intellectual property is quite clear - and the reasons that we have copyright and patent laws are still fundamentally sound.
Give me a break. (Score:4)
Anyone can saunter into the USPTO and peruse the files.
It's a very different question as to whether a government agency should be required to spend taxpayer dollars to make their files freely available on the internet. The cost for doing so is non-trivial; many would argue that the people who use it should pay for it.
Would you expect to go to the USPTO and not have to pay for use of the photocopy machine ? I wouldn't.
What about their website? (Score:2)
Maan
That's the spirit...not (Score:1)
I Have a Better Idea (Score:2)
I find this very hard to believe. If some of the patents on various drugs were dropped today, this probably would benefit some 3d world countries, but I can't see too many large pharma companies investing their resources in developing new drugs. If that happened, when the current generation of drugs becomes obsolete (evolution, y'know), we'd be pretty much screwed.
Of course, in moderation this could work-- and well! Several developing nations *do* allow companies to make generic copies of drugs that help with many of the problem diseases. A recent UN resolution (check your favourite news sites) actually condones this practice to some degree. For example, South Africa manufactures copies of various AIDS drugs to help people who could *never* afford these drugs. They were being sued by serveral of the large American pharma companies for this, but the suits have since been dropped.
The real problem with patents on medicines is that in order to design and test a new drug (to make sure it works and is safe!), a pharma company needs to invest huge amounts of money. To turn a profit on this investment before their patent runs out, they *have* to charge such high prices on the drug. This puts the drug out of reach of people living in essentially all developing countries, and many people in the so-called developed countries. Only those fortunate enought to be wealthy or have exceptional healthcare coverage have access to them.
Short of a global, socialist healthcare system (yeah right), I don't seem much of an effective solution other than the current one-- i.e. enforce patent laws on drugs here to allow the companies to turn a profit, and ignore any "violations" by developing countries. Kind of depressing in a way...
Re:public information (Score:1)
You said:
"1) When i say "everyone" has the right to peruse public information, i mean that The Opportunity Exists. I think you are saying that all citizens should have access to public information all the time. I agree in theory, however it is impractical to say the least. Certainly most public libraries are equipped with internet access, but what about those people who are living/on vacation hundreds of miles from a public library?"
Hmm. Well, this sounds like you're saying "Since it's impractical on a small scale for many people to get to a library or other Internet access point, why should be bother to make it accessable to anyone at all?" You're right that not everyone is always at a public internet terminal, but I named that only as a lowest common denominator really, since libraries are in most towns / areas.
You also wrote: "It's their choice - as long as there is still some method of access we're still doing alright."
OK, facietious alert;)
If the patent office was only open 6 months a year, would that be "some method of access" good enough for this? How about 3 months? One week? Three days of banker's hours, every other year, and never when those days fall on Sundays? I object to government arrogance as unreasonable, but it sounds to me like you're apologizing for it.
The government (the managing authority that we pay for, *not* a kingdom or a theocracy which can claim spiritual or absolute dominion) *does* have an obligation to publish as widely as practical within its budget of our dollars, and I think that right now that means the Net -- with online publishing, we're giving it a "big enough lever" to better use the money exacted from us for its operation. Less horrible stewardship, that is. (Yes, USPTO funding is more complicated, but they do get congressional funding and they are established in the service of the public).
Heh, wish I had time for further response, perhaps later.
Cheers,
timothy
Re:public information (Score:3)
Two objections, at least:
1) Define "everyone" in the context of "everyone has a right to peruse it" which I think is a fair paraphrase of what you said there. OK, sticking with citizens of particular countries' own patent offices, and in the U.S.
2) For IBM / Delphion to host that info *is* (and is about to become "was") a gift, not a right. Their online tools are better than the ones offered by the patent office itself, too. But in an age where the information can be put online with a similar application of effort to making it available only in person (and with a lot of other practical advantages too -- say, internal use by patent examiners), I'd say it is the burden of the government we pay for to be transparent unless there is a compelling reason for it not to be. So having that information *is* a right, though whether online is the best place for it may be something we disagree about. The USPTO will probably always be behind private companies in its interface etc (it's underfunded and a part of the government), but yes, the right to the knowledge it produces is shared by every citizen. That's exactly what the Net can allow!
On the other hand, bandwidth charges might be reasonable, to prevent people from simply slurping the info up all day at other taxpayers' expense, but they should be conservative and not exact an undue burden, just enough to cover actual used bandwidth / CPU time.
timothy
Re:I Got a Better Idea (Score:2)
Ah. So we're seeing one giant step BACKWARDS the past few years, then.
----
Re:Nothing left to patent (Score:1)
Nope: urbanlegends.com rebuttal [urbanlegends.com].
/.
Re:Why should everything be free? (Score:2)
Actually, the PTO has been supported by user fees for some years now.
As for the issue of providing the patent database free of charge: If the government is going to penalize you for doing X (or enforce third-party civil sanctions against you for doing X), then it incurs an obligation to inform the public of what exactly X is.
Otherwise, the government could do things like incorporate some sort of pay-per-view technology into speed-limit signs. (Perhaps I shouldn't give them ideas....)
/.
Re:I Got a Better Idea (Score:2)
Read the article about obstetric forceps [newscientist.co.uk] in the April 21 edition of New Scientist. How many women and children died because the inventors of forceps kept them secret for over a century rather than lose the family business by revealing the design? For all its faults, just getting rid of the patent system could make things worse than they are now.
European patent office. (Score:2)
Re:I Got a Better Idea (Score:2)
Ahh, I see now.
--
use pat2pdf to get pdf formatted patents (Score:3)
formatted pdf formatted patents.
Top two faves of mines (Score:2)
http://www.gibbsgroup.com/patents_etc_cafe/pate
So why didn't I hyperlink it... Because I didnt want to type much nor did I want some retarded goatse.cx forker to ramble on.
It all started by inventing the wheel... (Score:1)
The current numbering scheme started with Pat.Nr. 1 (one). And I admire the clerks at the time there for their humour, by selecting the invention of the 'Wheel' as the first =)
US 1 - Traction Wheels - patented july 13 1836 by Mr. Ruggles!
Re:Patents and Frequencies? (Score:2)
I used the amateur example since I figured it'd be more relevant to folks here than the nuances of the commercial world. But your comments are a good reminder that until there is legislation protecting the amateur frequencies from unilateral FCC redesignation, they're at the mercy of the agency.
And also, your post is a good reminder that hams (of which I am one, obviously:-) ) need to keep experimenting with all the frequencies - you never know when one is going to be handy for a future application.
"Make June 23 cm (1.2 GHz) month!"
*scoove*
Re:Give me a break. (Score:3)
Option A. The Paper Trail
- a dozen librarians (or more)
- a big building
- tons of desks, shelves, etc.
- lights and HVAC/environmentals to keep the librarians and the paper happy
- all the misc things human employees require, like benefits, vacation time, break rooms, restrooms, coffee machines, chairs, pcs, servers for email, LAN, printers, Internet connections to surf, etc.
Option B. Web Server
- contractor to scan/insert images
- employee to sample/inspect insertions
- servers for web and database
Sure, I'm oversimplifying, but I'd be terribly surprised if the paper-only approach was cheaper than the database approach. People aren't cheap.
*scoove*
Patents and Frequencies? (Score:5)
Fail to read a book before writing your own, and you might miss some entertainment or information. (The likelyhood of you writing the same book that's there is... well... has anyone got a bunch of monkeys and typewriters?)
Fail to read a patent before making/releasing your own invention, and open yourself to significant liabilities.
The same goes for coming up with that awesome product name - failing to search the trademark database and you might end up spending years paying someone else for the damage.
That all said, I think another metaphor might yield better results. Persons who obtain FCC radio licenses (amateur, commercial, etc.) have to study material and pass a test prior to obtaining the license. Even when the test is passed, they still pay an application fee for the license. Patents are a license of a sort - a grant to exclusivity in many ways similar to the purchase of FCC-administered spectrum.
How about an alternate approaches to patents? Since DNA and arguably all other "inventions" existed in nature and were discovered rather than invented, why don't we instead treat them as a public asset and auction them off to the highest bidder?
Say I discover through DNA research (or whatever it is they
Then, we'll take 10% of the winning bid price and give it to me for the discovery. If I want to commercialize it, then I'd better be the highest bidder too (and end up paying myself that 10%, so I have a built-in discount of 10% if I win - fair credit to the inventor).
This process would then *strongly* encourage patent licensees to actually commercialize and use their patent, rather than acquire them only to sqelch use. (I.e. if you can afford $5 billion and not use the technology, you'll probably suffer the consequences).
The bidding process does another thing by putting up a proposed new invention for sale. It allows disclosure of the proposed invention prior to its assignment - something seriously absent in today's process.
Imagine the FCC announcing a planned auction of 144 MHz to 148 MHz - they'd hear very quickly that someone already has that license. That might have a similar effect with respect to these foolish patent give-aways.
*scoove*
Re:Patents and Frequencies? (Score:3)
Well, technically that's not true. To get a ham (amateur radio) license, you have to pay a fee to to the VEC who gives you the test in order to take the test, but the license itself is free. This has the effect of causing you to have to pay again for another test if you fail the first one or want to upgrade your license, but you don't have to pay any fee for the license itself.
Imagine the FCC announcing a planned auction of 144 MHz to 148 MHz - they'd hear very quickly that someone already has that license.
144-148 MHz is the 2 meter amateur band. Nobody really has a license to that band per se; the FCC simply has decided to grant amateurs with valid licenses the right to do certain things on those frequencies. Theoretically, anytime they wanted the FCC could revoke that right and do whatever they felt like with those particular frequencies. There has already been some concern that the FCC may do just that with some of the less used amateur frequencies, so there's no reason to believe they COULDN'T do it with the 2 meter band, which is perhaps the most commonly used amateur band.
Re:Patents and Frequencies? (Score:1)
communism and capitalism, two paths to slavery.
Failure is Better (Score:1)
:P
If you know of anything that lasts FOREVER please don't hide it. A discovery this important belongs next to the "Perpetual Motion Machine"
Delphion is for patent factories (Score:2)
Folks, this is for corporate legal offices, and does not bode well for the struggling entrepreneur or the academic researcher. The speed and versatility of Delphion is like giving the lumber corporations bulldozers and chainsaws while the natives still just have spears. Delphion raises the bar of information availability, but is priced out of the range of those who are most likely to invent the compelling inventions rather than the incremental turf-protecting legal instruments.
Re:Delphion is for patent factories (Score:2)
I'm not talking about VC money here. And I'm not talking about mommy-still-makes-the-bed. If you have an extra $900/year laying around, I have an address to give you.
Good move by IBM (Score:3)
Re:What about their website? (Score:3)
Be VERY careful with that.
-----
"Goose... Geese... Moose... MOOSE!?!?!"
Re:Patents and Frequencies? (Score:2)
------
No access? That's not necessarily (Score:2)
No doubt some think me wrong about this.. feel free to express YOUR opinion.
The USPTO has the neatist things (Score:3)
Goods and Services IC 042. US 100 101. G & S: providing news, information, products, on-line tools and services via the internet for a select audience. FIRST USE: 19981028. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19981028
Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
Serial Number 75908557
Filing Date February 2, 2000
Owner (APPLICANT) Andover.Net, Inc. CORPORATION DELAWARE 50 Nagog Park Acton MASSACHUSETTS 01720
Attorney of Record GAILYC SONIC CALLANAN
Type of Mark SERVICE MARK
Register PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE
That's a terrible idea (Score:1)
Didn't think so.
Why should everything be free? (Score:3)
The records are available. They may not be made in the most convenient form, but the information is available.
If you want everything done for you, someone has to pay for it. If you want the wonderfully formatted patents, pony up the cash. Someone has to foot the bill.
The patent office makes them available, but should our taxes be raised to subsidize everything? People doing patent research can pony up the money and pay for this service.
Has it occured to anyone here that people's time costs money?
I forgot, this is Slashdot. Once you incorporate, you have an obligation to do things for the Slashdot crowd, give them your research, etc.
Give me a break.
There ain't no such thing as a free lunch. TANSTAAFL
Alex
Re:USPTO and Public Patents (Score:5)
So is LinuxGram (Score:1)
LinuxGram is changing from a free service to a subscription [g2news.com] service, too. And on the same day -- June 1.
*sigh* I guess the free days of the Internet are coming to an end...
Super eurobeat from Avex and Konami unite in your DANCE!
USPTO has a patent search (Score:2)
You have to pay for quality copies, but you always had to do this at IBM. Could someone please post and explain why this service of the goverment is so lacking? Or do people not know about it?
Re:Patents and Frequencies? (Score:1)
In that case, who collects the revenue out of this patent? Will it be US Govt? If so, then what about the other countries? They may not respect a patent sold to someone by US govt. Or, they may even decide to sell it to someone else in their own country. Then the same patent will be held in different countries by different people. The current agreements and treaties on Patents will fail, if such a scheme goes thru IMHO.
Re:Patents and Frequencies? (Score:1)
Ugh! Think about it -- currently, the inventor could sit on the patent and "squelch use." Conversely, if you invent it, you can keep it from begin squelched. With your scheme, it could just as easily be squelched, but it would be up to the highest bidder, not the inventor. Hardly an improvement!
The USPTO search engine (Score:3)
The PTO site does return images in TIFF format. AlternaTIFF [mieweb.com], a free browser plug-in (Netscape, IE, Opera, Win32) handles them well. Printing works, and gets you a clean, high-quality copy of the patent.
Re:I Have a Better Idea (Score:1)
Mirror Delphion Patent Database into Freenet (Score:2)
In a way, this could help legitimize the use of Freenet, because while it is easy to demonize kiddie porn and mp3z, it would be harder to demonize a bunch of hackers that were fulfilling a need that should have been satisfied by the US Patent Office. Oh, Freenet has searchable indices now. If I had more than a measly 28.8 dialup connection, I would start mirroring. All we need is a bunch of DSL users to pitch in, pick year intervals for the patents that they will be moving, and each start the mass Freenet insertion.
Re:What about their website? (Score:1)
Re:Give me a break. (Score:1)
USPTO (Score:4)
You can search for and read patents online at http://www.uspto.gov/main/patents.htm [uspto.gov]
Where's the problem ?
Admittedly they do charge for the nicely formatted PDF or paper versions, but it's not that bad...
Re:Another way to make money off patents! (Score:1)
Costs of Patent Research (Score:2)
I've found that the actual patent document only tells a small part of the patent-saga. More revealing is the patent's file wrapper - a hefty folder (or in the case of some software patents, not so hefty) kept by the PTO that contains official correspondence between the inventor (or inventor's representatives, i.e. lawyers) and the patent examiner.
By scrutinizing documents in the file wrapper, you can discern the amount of effort put in by the examiner, the examiner's conception of related prior art (which might, unsurprisingly, be quite limited), and whether or not the original claims were rejected/amended.
While the patent itself might be freely accessible, expect to pay the PTO for access to the patent's documentation.
Vergil Bushnell
old trick (Score:1)
Free International Patent Search (Score:1)
http://ipdl.wipo.int [wipo.int].
http://ep.espacenet.com [espacenet.com]
I have spent hundreds of hours searching the www.patents.ibm.com website. By operating the website IBM generated a lot of goodwill, which is defined as the favor or prestige that a business has acquired beyond the mere value of what it sells. I guess goodwill isn't worth what it used to be.
philosophical argument against software patents (Score:1)
Yes, that means if you perform or cause to be performed a set of mathematical operations that someone else has patented, and are discovered, men with guns will come and stop you. Only the patent holders (and licensees, if applicable) are allowed to do this math; because it's a patent, it doesn't matter if you derived these mathematical operations independently or not.
It's hard for me to articulate the degree to which I feel this represents an unconsionable hindrance in the advancement of human understanding. What does society gain by having the government say who may perform what mathematical operations by beaurocratic fiat?
It's nuts to use IBM patent server anyway (Score:1)
Re:typing much.. (Score:1)
So why didn't I hyperlink it... Because I didnt want to type much...
Re:Give me a break. (Score:2)
For the record I mentioned the change to Deliphon last week [slashdot.org]. Should've submitted a story.
Re:Patents and Frequencies? (Score:2)
Then it's a good thing you can't patent naturally occurring genes.
You cannot patent natural discoveries, such as genes.
Now, you're going to object that you've seen dozen of reports in the popular press of companies patenting naturally occurring genes. How is this, you ask?
Well, the truth is that they didn't technically patent the gene itself, but did something almost as good (or bad, depending on your perspective).
You can patent the use of a gene for a particular purpose. "Use of gene X to treat genetic disease Y," for example. The problem comes when people say, "Use of gene X for A, B, C, D, E, .... " and list a couple of hundred different potential uses. Nearly as good as if they had patented the gene itself.
I agree this is still a problem. I'm just explaining, because those of you who say "It's outrageous that they can patent something that occurs naturally!" can't properly fight the problem until you understand it.
For those of you who still don't believe me, I challenge you to find a single patent where a naturally occurring gene is claimed.
Re:USPTO and Public Patents (Score:2)
And it's just one more example of why the stories on /. are so bad. Timothy couldn't take 30 seconds to find this out for himself before posting???!!
On another note, it's worth mentioning that the USPTO site has every patent back to some time in 1834, and every known patent back to the foundation of the Patent Office, in 1790.
("Every known patent" because the patent office suffered a major fire in 1834, destroying all of its records up to that point. Some of the pre-1834 patents were recovered, when people who had copies of those patents sent them to USPTO, but some are lost for good.)
The Delphion site only went back to sometime in the 1960s, IIRC.
Re:Why should everything be free? (Score:2)
Oh please. The /. hivemind is nowhere near Libertarian. It's more accurately characterized as "I want everything for free, now." In some instances the outcome of this philosophy aligns with libertarian principles, and in such cases the hivemind will claim to be libertarian, in the hopes of deceiving people into thinking that it has more noble principles than simply "I want everything for free, now." But I don't know any libertarian who believes that all corporations are evil and must be stopped, as the hivemind does.
Use the Federal Court model (Score:2)
Granted, the US Patent and Trademark office is presently quite searchable [uspto.gov], and these searches are for free. But if they could not be available for no cost, the model they should follow is that of the United States' Federal Court's Public Access to Court Records (PACER) [uscourts.gov] system. Note this is an explicit congestion notification impaired link, so shut TCP ECN off if you wish to go there.
The PACER system charges for searches and retreival of court documents. The rate is presently seven cents per "page" (about 50 lines of monospaced text, more or less), or sixty cents per minute if you dial an 800 number with a modem. Most Federal Courts are online and searchable.
Given the large amount of work that goes into putting huge amounts of data online like patents and court records, a minor fee likely is approriate for accessing these records. As long as it isn't prohibitive to the common person, paying on the order of micropayments for access to data is not such a bad idea.
Yeah but... (Score:1)
Question? (Score:1)
Everything on the web should be free (Score:2)
The reaction to this strikes me as another good example of the "everything on the web should be free" mentality.
Where is it such a crime for these people to start charging for access? I think all of us would agree that the people who maintain this database deserve to be compensated for their work. That salary has to come from somewhere, doesn't it?
And the storage space for all the patent information. The hardware (disks, cpu, etc.) that's not free is it?
I don't know what IBM's business model was when they were running it but you can be assured that IBM doesn't give stuff away; somehow they saw this database as a benefit to themselves.
Onorio Catenacci
--
"And that's the world in a nutshell -- an appropriate receptacle."
Re:Delphion is for patent factories (Score:2)
Ok, so for less than the cost of a cheap dsl line, a company that wants access can get it...
Somehow these prices do not look like they are intended to only service large companies and corporate offices (otherwise the cost would be in the thousands of dollars per month like many other electronic legal resources)
Re:The USPTO has the neatist things (Score:1)
Is that the Legalese translation of "News for Nerds... Stuff that Matters"?
Nothing left to patent (Score:1)
I could provide references to this but...
Out of Caffine Error, Operator Halted!
Re:Nothing left to patent (Score:1)
29 Economist, April 13, 1991, p.83.
Oh, yeah... (Score:1)
Kinda like the DMCA, right? Oh... the DMCA applies EVEN WITH patent laws. Interesting.
We should be thankful there arent copyright issues (Score:2)
I wonfer about copyrighting the layout and display characteristics of a patent search engine...
--
They charge for accurate searching (Score:1)
Re:Everything on the web should be free (Score:1)
Re:USPTO and Public Patents (Score:1)
Another way to make money off patents! (Score:3)
What's next? Delphion will probably patent their patent-searching engine. =)
I Got a Better Idea (Score:2)
I got a better idea. Close down the Patent Office and revoke all patents. That would solve the problem. Trademarks are something else though. They are part of of someone's or some company's identity. Still I think the kind of stuff that people are allowed to trademark are ludicrous.
Re:I Got a Better Idea (Score:2)
I don't think so. All countries would have to follow suit. It would cause unprecedented development around the world. People would no longer be hampered by fascist laws and life saving drugs would suddenly be affordable to third world countries. In case you have forgotten we are one species and the earth is not inhabited by US. citizens alone.
Also the best possible solutions to technological problems would be quickly adopted by all as opposed to people spending an incredible amount of effort trying to circumvent somebody else's patent and reinventing the wheel. What a waste!
Re:I Got a Better Idea (Score:2)
Why?
Because the U.S. is the leading economic zone of the world and everybody wants a part of that market.
It would cause unprecedented development around the world.
Paid for by whom?
By the zillions of manufacturers who already manufacture tons of products that are not patented and make an excellent living doing so. Look what happen to Zerox after most of their patents ran out. They've had a monopoly for so long, they got lazy. They forgot how to make a quality product. Others came and did better.
Certainly not corporations, who would see half priced knockoffs soon after they hit the streets. How will they recoup R&D costs?
Only the patent holders who are fleecing the world by taking advantage of unatural laws that take away our freedom. Now, if you ask, "how are new things going to be invented if there are no patent laws?" My answer would be that people can form consortiums to develop new technologies that will be shared for the benefit of everybody. If you think that people cannot get together to innovate, consider NASA. Consider the trip to the moon. Consider the ISS. Consider also that innovation is already heavily funded by governments around the world through grants and contracts. Do a search on the net for DARPA funded projects and you'll get an idea of what I'm talking about.
Getting rid of patent laws would unleash unprecedented growth and allow small companies to compete on a more equal footing. Increased tax revenues would fuel even more grants and innovative projects.
what large amount of work? (Score:3)
Even if it was just for internal document management purposes, it would be cheaper for the US government to scan documents than to route them around in paper form. A fast Internet connection costs a significant amount of money when purchased in the free market, but the US government has negotiated contracts for free Internet services based on giving companies access to public infrastructure to put in fiber, etc., and the cost to Internet providers is small.
In comparison, the cost of maintaining large public buildings with huge amounts of publically accessible paper records, plus the staff to maintain them, is very high.
So, no, altogether, I don't see why access to public records over the Internet should cost any money. Even if such access is provided in addition to the physical locations, the incremental cost is tiny. And if such access is provided to replace some physical locations, we could save a lot of money. It is time for the US government to stop thinking of computerized access as a luxury and to start thinking of it as a way to make more public records available to more people at a lower cost.
from my university's website (Score:5)
IP Australia [ipaustralia.gov.au]
US Patent & Trademark Office (UPSTO) [uspto.gov]
European Patent Office [european-p...office.org]
for a few
Re:Better than Failure (Score:2)
--
"Fuck your mama."