23 Jan
2007
23 Jan
'07
11:50 p.m.
They weren't considered "obvious" at the time.
(note also, that I proposed patenting "creation of combustion", NOT
patenting the existence of combustion (THAT I only trademarked))
EVERYTHING is "obvious" after some years.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com
On Tue, 23 Jan 2007, Jim Isbell, W5JAI wrote:
I believe those items fall under the other heading
mentioned,
"obvious". Also, I doubt there would be much money to be made from
the first two of those patents......another motivation for seeking for
patents. As for the one that has commercial possibilities, creating
fire, that would not be patentable except as it applied to a
particular method. Fire itself is not an invention its a natural
process of decay. The commercial methods have all been patented in
one way or another...i.e. Internal combustion gasoline engine (patent
has run out), diesel engine (patent has run out), etc.
On 1/23/07, Fred Cisin <cisin at xenosoft.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jan 2007, Jim Isbell, W5JAI wrote:
> > "Prior Art" has no standing anymore. Its now, who gets there first
> > with the patent. Been that way for about 5 years now (maybe longer)
> > when they changed the law.
>
> Has anybody filed for chiseling data into stone?
> How about flaking flint to get a sharp edge?
> How about creating combustion (FIRE (tm))