America's Last Top Models (newyorker.com) 17
For decades, U.S. inventors sent in models with their patent applications -- gizmos that reveal a secret history of unmet needs and relentless innovation. The New Yorker: The ruins of American invention have been recently resurrected in a former textile mill in Wilmington, Delaware. The Henry Clay Mill, now better known as Hagley Museum and Library Visitor Center, is perched on the banks of Brandywine Creek, at the southern edge of a sprawling estate once owned by the du Pont family; just upstream lies the oldest of the dynasty's several stately homes in the region, as well as the remains of the gunpowder works upon which its fortune was built. One morning, Chris Cascio, a curator, welcomed me into the mill, where the space once occupied by cotton-picking and carding machines now houses a curious exhibit: the scavenged remainders of a much larger, long-lost museum.
From 1790 to 1880, Cascio explained, the U.S. Patent Office first encouraged and then required an inventor to submit a model along with each application. These models -- thousands of miniature devices, often exquisitely detailed -- were then exhibited in Washington, D.C., in the office's model gallery. Sometimes called the "Temple of Invention," the gallery was a bustling landmark: it regularly attracted up to ten thousand visitors a month and was ranked as "the greatest permanent attraction in the city," according to one newspaper. But by the late nineteenth century it had effectively shut its doors. Hagley's latest exhibit, "Nation of Inventors," is the largest permanent public display of patent models since that time.
[...] The U.S. system was also unique in that no other country required a model to accompany a patent application. The reasons why soon became clear. As early as the eighteen-thirties, the collection had outgrown the Patent Office's cramped headquarters at the former Blodgett's Hotel. In 1836, a fire destroyed at least seven thousand models, but, rather than abandon the requirement, the Patent Office doubled down, securing congressional funding to reconstruct the models and laying the foundations for a truly monumental building, with a facade modelled after the Parthenon. The structure, which now houses the Smithsonian's American Art Museum and the National Portrait Gallery, occupies an entire city block. In the engineer Pierre L'Enfant's master plan for the capital, it was intended to serve as a kind of nondenominational "church of the republic," between the White House on one side and the Capitol on the other.
From 1790 to 1880, Cascio explained, the U.S. Patent Office first encouraged and then required an inventor to submit a model along with each application. These models -- thousands of miniature devices, often exquisitely detailed -- were then exhibited in Washington, D.C., in the office's model gallery. Sometimes called the "Temple of Invention," the gallery was a bustling landmark: it regularly attracted up to ten thousand visitors a month and was ranked as "the greatest permanent attraction in the city," according to one newspaper. But by the late nineteenth century it had effectively shut its doors. Hagley's latest exhibit, "Nation of Inventors," is the largest permanent public display of patent models since that time.
[...] The U.S. system was also unique in that no other country required a model to accompany a patent application. The reasons why soon became clear. As early as the eighteen-thirties, the collection had outgrown the Patent Office's cramped headquarters at the former Blodgett's Hotel. In 1836, a fire destroyed at least seven thousand models, but, rather than abandon the requirement, the Patent Office doubled down, securing congressional funding to reconstruct the models and laying the foundations for a truly monumental building, with a facade modelled after the Parthenon. The structure, which now houses the Smithsonian's American Art Museum and the National Portrait Gallery, occupies an entire city block. In the engineer Pierre L'Enfant's master plan for the capital, it was intended to serve as a kind of nondenominational "church of the republic," between the White House on one side and the Capitol on the other.
You still need one for a perpetual motion device (Score:2)
The USPTO will grant you a patent on your perpetual motion invention if you submit a working model. This is why perpetual motion crackpots file patents for devices that output exactly as much energy as is input, with no loss. That doesn't require a working model, unlike "over unity" devices.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re:You still need one for a perpetual motion devic (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
The USPTO could reject the patent on those grounds but doesn't have to. Just because someone receives a patent doesn't mean that the invention necessarily works. But the patent office will require a working model if the application claims that the device puts out more energy than it takes in. Don't claim that and you may get your patent.
There is even a patent category for such things:
F03B17/04 - Alleged perpetua mobilia
Perpetua mobilia of alleged kind, i.e. devices where the hydrostatic thrust effect is use
Re: (Score:3)
No, the USPTO will *NOT* grant a patent for a perpetual motion machine. It will be flat out rejected for lack of credibility due to involving perpetual motion (which is impossible)...
Re-read the post you replied to: "The USPTO will grant you a patent on your perpetual motion invention if you submit a working model."
If you can submit a working model, then I think you've got credibility (and have apparently discovered an error in known physics).
Also, by definition, a rejection for lacking utility would be inappropriate if the perpetual motion machine does work.
Re: You still need one for a perpetual motion devi (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You don't know what you're talking about. The USPTO has granted many patents for "suspected" (ahem) perpetual motion machines. I posted a link to some examples, but here's an interesting explanation of one case by a patent attorney:
https://unmakeme.com/2022/05/0... [unmakeme.com]
The secret to getting your patent granted (besides arguing a lot with the patent examiner) is to avoid claiming "over unity", even if your device would clearly provide that if it did as you described.
And, as the other poster mentioned, an actual w
Re: (Score:2)
Hagley Museum (Score:4, Informative)
Software Patents (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Definitely Upstream (Score:3)
at the southern edge of a sprawling estate once owned by the du Pont family; just upstream lies the oldest of the dynasty's several stately homes in the region
The Du Pont family was not going to live downstream of their own facilities even then.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But at least they could drink the water.
Models in the National Portrait Gallery (Score:1)
I don't care ... (Score:1)
Top Models? (Score:2)
Is this really an article about top models? Why is there no mention of Claudia Schiffer, Cindy Crawford and the like?