First it is HIGHLY UNLIKELY you will build a unique software capability. But if you do, it's protected by copyright.

I saw an article a few years ago about how messed up the patent system was.
Someone, just to show they could, patented the process for making breakfast cereal.
Not any particular kind, just the whole, pour cereal in bowl, add milk process for making your breakfast.

I agree and I think they gave out some tech patents that shouldn't have. Apple is an example. They were able to patent things that had prior art

ETA:Dang it. Seems like the Penguin and others beat me to it

I see it a lot in the Semiconductor field. A company will invent a new process but neglect to patent some small component of the process.
A troll comes by and takes out a patent and then sues the inventor for infringement.

Companies have folded because of this.

That's the bullshit part in my opinion.  If someone is already using that method or can show that they have in the past, they should get an automatic pass to continue using that process.

As an example of a messed up patent, I give you this:

Swinging

Yes, it's been rescinded but it was issued and valid at one time.

Maybe you missed the law change last year.  Quick google search found these:
http://www.freakonomics.com/2011/09/20/will-first-to-file-hurt-small-inventors/
http://betanews.com/2011/09/08/colossal-change-to-u-s-patent-system-nears-with-todays-america-invents-vote/

Essentially now you can patent anything that isn't already patented.

Here's the one I filed a few weeks ago.  What do you guys think?

http://www.jcrichman.com/gallery/patent/patent_final.pdf

Basically covers this:

On the topic of Patents.

http://www.engadget.com/2012/08/07/apple-lands-patent-for-nfc-ready-shopping-app/

http://www.engadget.com/2012/08/07/microsoft-patents-contextual-ads-in-e-books/

If I devise a unique user interface, or a I develop an algoritm which, say, allows for a more rapid precise GPS position determination, do you think those are worthy of patent protection?  If not, why not?

It should be possible to challenge a patent as being too broad.  The idea of a digital shopping cart is not specific enough, IMO.

It means big companies will be even stronger and little companies will get screwed. Because who writes laws? Lobbyists for large corporations.

Cool, you are trying to patent home delivery.

Why not?  Let me give a specific example.  Say I've developed a way to process 1553 bus information in real time, overwrite iand put it back on the bus within a frame.  That is a very marketable capability.  I spent tons of money developing and testing that capability and even more proving it as reliable to potential customers.  Why shouldn;t I be able to benefit from this effort?  And if I can't ensure I'll benefit from such an effort, why would I bother spending that kind of cash when I can just steal other peoples' ideas?  

Let me clear, I'm talking about specific implamentations here, not broad ideas.

In fact, I have (or rather, me and my team). :)  Patent application under review as we speak.

And a machine is just mechanics (math).  It's not the math that patented, but it's unique application.

Little more complicated and specific than that.

I agree wholeheartly.
This is getting stupid.
I need to go squat on a patent and get paid for simple concepts that has prior art because they sure don't seem to mind giving you a pantent for it.

Oh crap I thought you were joking and didn't really read it all.

So you got a patent for taking a customers pizza/wings order, stopping by redbox to pick up their movie and deliver it to them? I didnt read the whole PDF but did you come up with some type or software or hardware interface to handle that?

Not being funny but really curious. How is that different from something like a messenger courier or delivery boy? Amazon has same day delivery in very limited markets and also groceries. If you're in one of those markets whats to stop you from buying a movie and a pizza from them and getting it delivered to your house of course you'd have to cook the pizza.

Again just asking the question. You can PM if you rather give a more detail repsonse

Yeah, he's trying to patent home delivery using a computer to arrange it so he could use a lot of big words on the patent application like "computing device" to awe and amaze the examiner.

Sure, it's kind of a cool idea, but filing crap like this is a perfect example of patent abuse and you're contributing to the problem in my opinion.

The requirements for receiving a patent on an invention are that the invention is:

1. of the type of subject matter that is patent eligible, i.e., a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter.  35 USC Sec. 101
2. useful, i.e., has utility.  35 USC Sec. 101
3. new.  35 USC Sec. 102(a), (b), (c), (d), and (e)
4. not obvious.  35 USC Sec. 103(a)

If an invention fails any of these requirements, it isn't patentable.  If a patent fails any of these requirements, it is invalid.  To the extent an issued patent isn't new, it's the fault of the Patent Office, not the Patent Act.

Take it easy, android.  If it's so obvious, show me the prior art.  Provisional was filed last June.

Daps, the application doesn't cover home delivery.  What it covers is a way to redesign Redbox's inventory control system, reservation system, kiosk firmware, and website, all in such a way as to enable delivery of reserved movies by third parties.

There actually is no prior art that comes very close to this.  The closest I found is airline ticket kiosks, in that they accept a readily communicated reservation number or code and ultimately dispense a boarding pass as a result.  But there is no inventory of boarding passes in the kiosk; they're printed on demand, and they aren't the reserved item.

Skip through the patent application down to the claims section starting on page 15 or so; claims cover what the patent actually would protect.  There are dependent claims which essentially cover a more restrictive embodiment, so if the general claim is judged too vague or obvious, the child claim might still apply.

As it happens, this patent app has less to do with home delivery than with, for instance, a fast food burger dispensing appliance which automatically takes a customer order and dispenses a precooked burger to a worker when the worker plugs in the order number.

An although it covers software embodiments, it does so in the context of certain types of machines.  So I think it's closer to a machine patent than a software process patent.

I guess I'll just have to go read the pdf you linked.

But for the redbox example are you working with redbox on this?
Let me see if I'm understanding th redbox situation.
I call Pizza hut and order a pizza and do I tell them which redbox movie I want and they handle it or does the customer handle it and tell the pizza hut which redbox has the movie reserved and they would pick it up?

The burger thing sounds almost like those places that have those tablets at the table and you can order off it without having to talk to a waitress.

Sorry to ask so many questions but I really trying to understand exact what the patentable product is. Can you give another example of how it would be used other than redbox or the burger

Wait is this where a customer places an order with a company and the picker is given the pick list or better yet a kitting list that has all the componets and once you have all the components boxed thats the finished good item?

Currently, you can reserve a Redbox movie through their website.  But you have to go to the kiosk to pick up the movie, because it requires that you swipe your credit card.

So how about changing the system so that, when you reserve a movie through the website, you get a confirmation code.  Then you call a delivery restaurant and tell them the code.  They bring your food, and pick up the movie for you on the way.

ETA: The patentable aspect appears to be the fact that there currently exists no vending machine on Earth which can accept a code or number indicating a dispensable good (code being generated on a separate system) and consequently dispense that product.  Or if there is, I'm unaware of it.

Ok that makes it a little clearer I think. It's a way of you ordering something but have a 3rd party pick it up with a verification code/email.
Sounds pretty close to what I posted but then again I may be missing the point again. Not the first time that's happen, actually not the first time today but that a whole new thread:)

http://www.sears.com/buyonlinepickupinstore/nb-100000000020520

How does it work?



Can someone else pick up my order?

Pretty much any law at a Federal level these days means BOHICA.  I'll pass, without even reading it.

Interesting.  Close, but that's not a vending machine.  The kiosk isn't managing its own inventory and basing its vending on the input code.  It's just sending the info on to a person to figure it out.

Think of my patent as covering "the automatic way to do all that without involving a salesman".

Here's my beef.

You idea boils down to a party that transports goods picking up goods from multiple locations for delivery to a single destination. Railroad do this, long haul truckers do this, ocean freighters and airlines do this, couriers do this and probably other parties do this that I can't even think of.

OK, there are different method of tracking, dispatching and authorizing pickups and deliveries but I don't think that just because you use a computer to perform a clerical or mechanical control action makes it worth a patent. You're basically using a computer for tasks that were done with paper documents in the past. Computers already unlock doors and vaults, granting an authorized agent access to a DVD is just yet another form of this.

I'm sure your examiner will grant this and you and your client will make some bucks off it, but I'm not seeing anything really new or innovative here. Not to say it isn't better than 90% of the crap my coworkers come up with in mandatory patent brainstorming sessions. Yes, I'm jaded.

Well, machines doing work that humans would otherwise have to manually do on paper is kinda... the point of machines.

So in this sense of describing a machine that does something humans would otherwise have to do, for which no machine has ever been described, I've invented a new machine.

I'm not sure how that warrants minimization.

Ok I'm just not getting it.
I guess I'll just have to wait till it's on the market and see it work in real time because I'm not seeing what's patentable

But let me take one more shot at it hahah
Back to your fast food and salesman(counterperson) Are you saying I go to a Burger King kiosk someplace and I want a whopper with cheese, pickles and no onions and I want to pick it up at the BK on Main street in 15mins. I place my order. The kiosk talks to BK system at the BK on Main St and out of some shoot the burger falls out into a box and tells the sandwhich maker to add the cheese, pickles and bag it up. I then walk in to that BK and give the counter girl my code from the kiosk that she punches in to complete the transaction and I walk out with my pre ordered burger?

ETA:
Good luck with it, even though I'm not getting. I can't knock someone for trying.

The kiosk is on the vending end.

How and where you place your order doesn't matter, so long as it's not through the kiosk.

So when you place your order (somewhere other than the kiosk), you receive a confirmation number.

Then someone (maybe you) goes to the vending kiosk, enters the confirmation number, and receives the product you ordered.

In a fast food example, this is one step removed from an automat.

Think of it this way.  You walk up to a coke machine at work.  You don't have pocket change or a single.  You whip out your smartphone and open the coke app on it.  You input the vending machine number printed clearly on the machine in front of you, or maybe even scan in a barcode or something on the machine via the phone's camera.  The coke app says "okay I recognize the machine, here's what it has available".  You click on "Sprite".  You enter your password and the app deducts $1 from your stored debit card info.  It displays a confirmation number.  You type in the confirmation number on the machine, and the machine spits out your Sprite.

That would be covered under my patent.  It doesn't really make much sense, since what coke machine has a keypad but no debit card slot?  But it would be covered under my patent, assuming that the app was aware of what soda was *in stock* on the machine.  For that last part to be true, you don't really want "a machine and an app", you want a comprehensive system that encompasses both the vending machine and the app, and also some back-end stuff that the vending machine and app both communicate with and through.  That whole combinatory system is itself a machine.

The big words that the other guy complained about, those words are necessary to precisely capture and communicate the concept.  We're trying with little words, and as you've noticed they just make things difficult.

(Incidentally, I'm the client for this patent; I thought it up and had the provisional drafted, then tweaked it slightly and submitted it as a final patent app.  I doubt I'll ever make money on it, but I consider it a very expensive lottery ticket; high risk high reward.  Besides, it's a learning experience, and it demonstrates breadth of knowledge to future clients and employers.  And you never know how the world works, maybe someday the above vision of a vending machine will be more common than what we have now.)

The problem is that it's possible to patent the concept of your method.  Not the implementation, but merely the idea of it being done.

So, someone who envisioned the overall process you have built may have patented it without ever making it reality.  Your implementation is now a violation of a patent.

Everything is just math. I can describe legitimate patentable items in pure mathematical terms. In fact I can describe everything ever patented in pure math terms. Therefor, nothing should be patented; it's just math.

An algorithm is a process, a way of doing something. It's not, "just math."

The short answer is too many patents are being issued that aren't really valid.  I have seen patents that were perpetual motion devices.  Using a laser pointer as a cat toy is patented.  They really need better quantity and quality of staffing.  I have my name on several patents that my employer thought were worth the time and trouble to patent, some of those I think are questionable.  I think it is something like 10k on average in legal fees to get a patent.   That too is a problem.

Ok it's setting in I think. Order any place, pick up at the kiosk with the confirmation number you have.

In china and some other place you can already buy cokes with your phone. They use NFC. Your info is stored on your phone. Google Wallet is suppose to be that way but also sounds like something Apple has in iOS6 called Passport

Yeah, there are vastly better ways to do cashless vending machines than the one I described.

But it does describe the concept.  And in the case of a Redbox kiosk, it makes a lot more sense.

Well good luck with it. Let us know how it goes.

We'll see.  The application is in!

Meh.  If I come up with a way to use math that's better than what everyone is was/is doing, I should be the sole benficiary of my genius for some time.

There are some things that should never be allowed to be patented. The location of a button? Now no other manufacturer can put the same button in a similar location. The motion of a swing? I'd like to patent the location of the steering wheel in a vehicle please and the motion of tires as they turn left to right.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say you're not an EE or CE, or have any background what so ever in the field...


From the examples you provided earlier; image proc, pattern rec, SAR, beam forming, etc. Unless certain things are done in certain orders with certain conditions, the shit doest work. It's not "just math," its not semantics. All of those require multiple steps, multiple processes applied, to do anything meaningful with them. There is no such thing as "oh, its just an equation. just math it and it works." That might be true for figuring out your miles per gallon, but not so much for things more complicated than that.

Guess what that above examples of needing multiple steps and orders and process is like? Oh yeah, kinda like how creating a new alloy requires certain steps in a certain order, under certain conditions, or it doesnt work.

I cant just look at a thermal return and be like "shazam, math motherfuckers!" and target returns magically pop out and are magically recognized. You know, because math!

Is it too late to patent this broad concept?

Fabricating or making anything out of tangible matter.  I know people have been doing this since the beginning of time...but has anyone bothered to patent it yet?

Looks like we've got a bunch of engineers here on the site. Can OP add a poll with some options?

* I am a software engineer and software patents make sense
* I am not a software engineer and software patents make sense
* I am a software engineer and software patents are bullshit
* I am not a software engineer and software patents are bullshit
* Pie

Dude we should TOTALLY do that! It's a process afterall!!!

Look up "Hotelling" that is how they get around it. After you have spent a couple years in DC learning the ropes you get to telecommute the whole job from wherever you want. I live in NJ and had about 5 of my friends all get jobs with the Patent office. They are all starting to filter up back here again as they qualify for hotelling.

Also thier Overtime system is very generous. Basically they hand you a laptop and say "any work submitted through this is your Overtime work". Teh guys I know basically would do thier workload, and then when they had free time during the workday they would work on the overtime submissions as well. I had one friend who was good at his job that was able to do his regular workload AND his full overtime workload all during his 40 hours a week, he more then doubled his salary.

Your point hinged on the example of a radar return, which is a piss poor example to use. As tracking returns IS fairly simple. I see you went to great length to avoid commenting on actually processes required in modern systems. I'll go back to a thermal return example, or we can use SAR (which you should be familiar with), the source data really isnt important...  

Target recognition requires certain steps applied in certain orders and in certain ways, to get any sort of meaningful results out of it. Getting recognition is not an iterative or simple application process when you can magic math into it. You do not know what filtering technique need to be applied or what PCA method to use or how to fit anything. You need to come up with custom tailored filters applied in specifics steps and specific time, with just the right gains in order to get anything remotely usable out of it. Just like, gasp, "take x grams of this element y grams of another - put in a furnace at 600degK for an hour, then add this enzyme and that compound etc."

Your example of the molecule I can very easily describe and model in pure path terms using multiple time delayed step functions. But then according to you, it would just be applied mathematics and no longer a process.

Also CS != Engineer.