18 Sep
2012
18 Sep
'12
12:29 a.m.
On 17/09/2012 20:02, Earl Evans wrote:
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 9:25 AM, David Riley
<fraveydank at gmail.com> wrote:
But of course otherwise you could patent the wheel...
... athough when reading some software patents you kind of feel thats
what they are trying to do
Does prior art have to be patented? I'm
certainly no lawyer, but I
was under the impression that what matters is that it existed before
the invention claimed, thus rendering the invention non-novel and
thus not valid for a patent. Thus, even though no one has patented
the wheel, you can't get a patent on it (though there are those who
have certainly managed to do so by hoodwinking the patent offices).
Is my understanding flawed? I'm certainly willing to believe it is.
I am also not a lawyer, but from pretty much everything I've read on this,
your understanding is correct. I believe that prior art does not need to
be in the form of a patent. It just needs to show that the invention
existed prior to the patent application. The Wikipedia page also seems to support this
contention:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prior_art
- Earl
--
Dave Wade G4UGM
Illegitimi Non Carborundum
*** For the Hams on the list three special event stations in Manchester now operational
*****
**** GB2012MV, GB2012MS and GB2012MW. See http://GB2012MS.COM/ for links and schedules.
***