Patent question

So, is it possible to patent a product that is a combination of two products. For instance, say I discovered that skis work really great in powder with a surfboard fin on each. Could I patent a product, like the surf ski, that's just a combo of two products already out there? Could I, for instance, get skis from K2 and fins from FCS, install them and sell them as a patented product in and of themselves? Or, assuming a ski with a surf fin actually would work really great and everyone would want to buy some, could larger companies (K2, salomon, Volkl, etc) just do the same thing and market it themselves, rendering my invention financially worthless to me?

Trying to settle an argument at work. Thanks.

You wouldn't have to have the product in hand, just the schematics. Then you could sell the idea to a ski manufacturer, or any company selling skis with fins on the bottom would owe royalties.

Patents are about ideas, not necessarily finished rpoduct.

Goode already has one.


















It's called a 'water ski'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bossass

Could I patent a product, like the surf ski, that's just a combo of two products already out there?

---

Yes, if it isn't deemed "obvious" by the inspector you get who reviews your patent application. Patents like this are given in the medical field fairly often..like if you took a bunch of blood filters and life support gadgets and hooking them together into a non-obvious system that does something new and innovative, you could then patent the system. Not sure what happens if the underlying items are patented - probably not an issue in getting the patent, but if you sold them you would have to deal with licensing, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bossass

Could larger companies just do the same thing and market it themselves, rendering my invention financially worthless to me?

---

This depends on how well your patent was written. Patent designs become public when granted, thus people can engineer around them. If someone came up with a non-obvious and new unique use of whatever you patented, or worked it into a system, they could patent it and/or you could not sue them for patent infringement.

..but this may all be wrong.

But patents are definitely not about ideas. Ideas cannot be patented. Things can be patented. But, ideas about things cannot be patented. I think that is what GeoMatt ment...

How about this? McConkey's water skis with bindings are a perfect example. Could he patent those? Waterskis aren't patented and ski bindings aren't patented, but could the combo be? Could the patent prevent Kidder, O'brien, Goode, etc from just getting their own ski bindings, mounting them and selling the product (assuming a good market for the product, it would be simple for these companies to just make a version of McC's ski themselves)

it is not a bright line, but probably not. you can only patent something if it is non-obvious enough. the guy who put an eraser on the end of a pencil was not able to patent that - too obvious...but the guy that put the clear plastic window in an envelope so you can see the address through from the letter was able to patent that and made millions of dollars. he gave my university its main library.

pretty fucked up. the pencil/eraser dude must be really bitter.

Sweet!! A nerd thread.

Patents and registered designs etc are only as useful as you are willing/able to fight for them. A big company can afford to keep tabs on patent filings relevant to their field, use your idea and bury you with lawyers in trying to defend your patent. If you have a fantastic idea, keep it as closely held as possible and try to get the biz plan/financial support to blow it into the market hard with a patent filing secured near time of launch so you can get a strong foothold in the market established.

I kind of disagree with how gonzo says patents are for things, not ideas. "Things" are protected more by a "registered design" than a patent so no one can copy your ski exactly and sell it, quite easy to get around. Patents are for the "physical embodiment of an idea". He is quite right that a poorly drafted patent isn't worth the paper it's written on.

Below are some facts from the Canadian Patent Office: http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/sc_mrksv/c...html#section01 ( I expect it wouldn't be much different in the US)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

patents cover new inventions (process, machine, manufacture, composition of matter), or any new and useful improvement of an existing invention;

What can you patent?
Suppose you are the proud inventor of an electric door lock. How do you know if you can obtain a patent for it? There are three basic criteria for patentability.

First, the invention must be new (first in the world). Second, it must be useful (functional and operative). Finally, it must show inventive ingenuity and not be obvious to someone skilled in that area.

The invention can be a product (a door lock), a composition (a chemical composition used in lubricants for door locks), an apparatus (a machine for making door locks) or a process (a method for making door locks), or an improvement on any of these. Ninety percent of patents are, in fact, for improvements to existing patented inventions.

A patent is granted only for the physical embodiment of an idea—e.g., the description of a plausible door lock—or for a process that produces something saleable or tangible. You cannot patent a scientific principle, an abstract theorem, an idea, a method of doing business, a computer program, or a medical treatment.

Novelty, Utility, Ingenuity

Novelty To be granted a patent you must be the original inventor of your door lock (or the assignee of the inventor). And it must be the first such door lock in the world.
What's more, you cannot obtain a valid patent in Canada if your invention was made public before you filed the application. There is, however, a one-year exception. If you, or someone who learned of the invention from you, discloses it publicly, you can still file in Canada within the year following that disclosure. (This applies to Canadian patents, but not necessarily to foreign ones.)

Utility A valid patent cannot be obtained for something that doesn't work, or that has no useful function. If your door lock does not work, it will fail the utility test.

Ingenuity To be patentable, your invention must be a development or an improvement that would not have been obvious beforehand to workers of average skill in the technology involved. You can't offer an electric door lock that's merely a bit faster or stronger than others and that any door lock designer could easily come up with. Your door lock must elicit a "why-didn't-I-think-of-that" reaction from other designers in the field.
You may obtain a patent for an improvement to an existing patented invention, but keep in mind that the original patent may still be in force. Hence, manufacturing or marketing the product with your improvement would probably be an infringement. This situation is often resolved by agreement between the patentees to grant licences to each other.

I trust your fin will fold up when you get to the groomers and flats. Nonetheless........
The unique combination angle is great, but consider the cost of not only getting the patent, but also the cost of pursuing infringement poachers. It's a long ugly trail of wasted money. I'd focus on schmearing the market in one big season to get the capital to do the rest. Don't focus on big money issues unless you have big money to waste. Just make and sell like crazy right out of the gate.

edit: http://www.uspto.gov/

Go get 'em, bossass.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PulverSchwein

I kind of disagree with how gonzo says patents are for things, not ideas. "Things" are protected more by a "registered design" than a patent so no one can copy your ski exactly and sell it, quite easy to get around. Patents are for the "physical embodiment of an idea". He is quite right that a poorly drafted patent isn't worth the paper it's written on.

---

We don't have "registered designs," as far as I am aware...and I am not that aware.

...and in the US, we call a "physical embodiment of an idea" a "thing" :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gonzo

We don't have "registered designs," as far as I am aware...and I am not that aware.

...and in the US, we call a "physical embodiment of an idea" a "thing" :D

---

You can get what are essentially registered designs here:

http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ40a.html#general

edit: wrong file

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gonzo

We don't have "registered designs," as far as I am aware...and I am not that aware.

...and in the US, we call a "physical embodiment of an idea" a "thing" :D

---

Heh, I'm kind of rookie at this and more familiar with my side of the border. I just know my boss keeps bugging me to "get that product configuration registered in Can and US" and I really should get on that some time soon. :)

What it comes down to is you can't just say in a patent filing: here is my thing, here is it's shape and what it does. You basically say: here is my novel idea, and demonstrate it is new and ingenious, and not obvious to others in the field, and here is how the idea is generally transmogrified into a physical item that works. It's a much more generic protection against anyone creating another similar "thing" based on your idea. RDs can be bypassed easily with only minor changes to the "thing".

Speaking of registered designs...........

When scientists around the world started decoding DNA and putting it up on the internet in a sort of gesture to science and humanity, people started grabbing strings of the code and patenting them.

An interesting current case is Research in Motion (RIM) the company that makes Blackberry PDAs. Apparently some guy in Illinois was granted a patent for a device for email over a cellular network. It was a very vague patent that covered all email on cell networks with no specific design covered. I'm pretty sure the guy never developed the product but patented the concept or idea. I think it's a ridiculous patent but US courts don't. When RIM hit the US market they were hit with a lawsuit they are currently fighting.

They are proceeding to court but apparently fully recognize a payment will be made. The point of going to court is more to force all cards on the table to get the info to make a determination of what should be paid. Apparently they have $500 million set aside already for a portion of the payment.

I guess if you talk a patent judge/officer/board into granting it you're golden otherwise you're just another guy glueing erasers on to pencils.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PulverSchwein

Heh, I'm kind of rookie at this and more familiar with my side of the border. I just know my boss keeps bugging me to "get that product configuration registered in Can and US" and I really should get on that some time soon. :)

---

I'm from Canada and I have no idea what your boss wants. There's trademarks, copyrights, patents, and trade secrets. See here for details I'm too lazy to copy. Canada and the US are pretty close. A patent must be registered in each country but patent rules are fairly unified and you can cover all the important parts of the world for a few million.

Quote:

---

What it comes down to is you can't just say in a patent filing: here is my thing, here is it's shape and what it does. You basically say: here is my novel idea, and demonstrate it is new and ingenious, and not obvious to others in the field, and here is how the idea is generally transmogrified into a physical item that works. It's a much more generic protection against anyone creating another similar "thing" based on your idea. RDs can be bypassed easily with only minor changes to the "thing".

---

Actually you can. A patent inspector doesn't evaluate the value of your idea; just that it meets the criteria.

I believe there's some info on global patents on the sites I posted for the US offices.

Look the other way please Ogre this gets nerd ugly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snow Dog

I'm from Canada and I have no idea what your boss wants. There's trademarks, copyrights, patents, and trade secrets.

---

Because of researching for this thread I now do. :D Guess I goofed the term, it's actually an "ïndustrial design" I was referring to for Canada. Commonly referred to as a registered industrial design. For US I am tasked with obtaining a "design patent", which is different from a regular "utility" patent. I'm registering the specific "design" of a clothing/equipment item we designed so no one can just copy it. nothing new about the technology though, just a pretty cool well integrated design.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Known in US as a Chapter 1500 Design Patent: pdf file from USTPO Site

An excerpt:
Since a design is manifested in appearance, the subject matter of a design patent application may relate to the configuration or shape of an article, to the surface ornamentation applied to an article, or to the combination of configuration and surface ornamentation....

Distinction Between Design and Utility Patents
In general terms a "utility patent"protects the way an aricle is used and works while a "design patent" protects the way an article looks.

Both utility and design patents can be held against the same article.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Canadian CIPO website re Industrial Designs: Nerd link

What is an industrial design?
An industrial design is the features of shape, configuration, pattern or ornament (or any combination of these features) applied to a finished article made by hand, tool or machine. It may be, for example, the shape of a table or the shape and ornamentation of a spoon.

The design must have features that appeal to the eye and although the Industrial Design Office will not judge the aesthetic merit of those features, the Office will assess originality.

Patents are for new inventions or processes that offer innovative and useful functions. Canadian law regards the functional aspects and design aspects of articles quite separately. Therefore, you cannot list a function as an element of your industrial design. You may, however, be able to obtain a patent for your article's functional aspects and an industrial design for its aesthetic ones. Suppose you develop a new kind of folding chair. The way the chair folds, its lightweight construction, its strength and its durability are all functional qualities. The industrial design features could include the shape or configuration of the chair, and any patterns or ornamentation on it or any combination thereof.


Gucci purses don't get utility patents, not much happening in purse innovation these days beside shape/color. They need to hold design patents, the legal tool they try to use to protect their design against being knocked off. Atomic skis likely get utility patents for innovative technology in their ski and design patent for how the ski looks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snow Dog

Actually you can. A patent inspector doesn't evaluate the value of your idea; just that it meets the criteria.

---

I never in mentioned value in my post. But anyways the second requirement in Canada is that it must be useful. I mainly equate an items value to it's usefulness. I think you kinda missed my point which is mainly that you can't take just anything you come up with and get it patented because it is a unique something. It needs to meet all the criteria listed. Nerd out. ;)

In theory, no. In practice few inspectors actually read the patents and now anything about whats written, and most corporate IP is vague changes that would be obvious to someone knowledgable in the art. At least that's my take on the 100's I've read. And your finned ski idea is taken.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by splat

Speaking of registered designs...........

When scientists around the world started decoding DNA and putting it up on the internet in a sort of gesture to science and humanity, people started grabbing strings of the code and patenting them.

---

One can only patent a gene and not any random sequence, unless that non-genetic sequence is shown to have a novel and, possibly, unique function heretofore unknown and not obvious (e.g., satellite DNA). Patenting genes is pretty tough, BTW.

At least in the software world, there's kind of a "patent arms race" going on. If you're in a market with three or four other companies, you patent as much of your technology as you can using as vague terms as you can get away with. Since everybody in your marketspace is doing almost the same thing with a different implementation, if they try to sue you for infringement, you can throw down your patent portfolio and tell them to back off.

Here's an example from Microsoft...they've got a patent pending for the boolean operator IsNot.

I hold patents on a number of designs/products:

The Electric Chair Toothbrush
Liquid Baby Powder
The Invisible Ink Copy Machine/Fax/Scanner/Printer
Canned Eggs(just the canning process actually)
The Computer Keyboard for Dyslexics scixelsyD rof draobyeK retupmoC ehT

I haven't made any profit(yet)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keoni

I hold patents on a number of designs/products:

The Electric Chair Toothbrush
Liquid Baby Powder
The Invisible Ink Copy Machine/Fax/Scanner/Printer
Canned Eggs(just the canning process actually)
The Computer Keyboard for Dyslexics scixelsyD rof draobyeK retupmoC ehT

I haven't made any profit(yet)

---

What about your 0-10 SAE sex lube, for those cold evening get togethers?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bossass

For instance, say I discovered that skis work really great in powder with a surfboard fin on each.

---

None of my business here but is this something you want to patent? Because if it is you're a bit too late. It was done about 6 years ago - called the ski-skeg or skeg-edge or something like that. Pretty small, retractable metal fin. Cool looking, I saw it on some XXXs in a bar in Verbier in '99 or '00. Come to think of it, I think it might have been Big Tim who patented it (and if it wasn't him it was one of his friends, I think).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PulverSchwein

I never in mentioned value in my post. But anyways the second requirement in Canada is that it must be useful. I mainly equate an items value to it's usefulness. I think you kinda missed my point which is mainly that you can't take just anything you come up with and get it patented because it is a unique something. It needs to meet all the criteria listed. Nerd out. ;)

---

I'm just saying that there no end of things like the "Flying Airbag Jumpsuit" (#6,708,927), an apparatus for slowly and safely descending from a high-rise building.

Maybe they'll use it in Fear Factor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 365wp

Here's an example from Microsoft...they've got a patent pending for the boolean operator IsNot.

---

That's ridiculous.