Thread: My set of steel, helping "arms".

Cheers, JV. Awesome holder. Greenie Launched.

Brilliant concept......Bugger, now you've started me thinking.

Well thought out, well designed, and executed, I like it!

Pics gone walkabout? Any idea where?

Joe

Not sure what's going on here, but I think GV might have spat the dummy due to the "Mounting Systems thread".

He seems to have cleared all of his pictures in all of his threads and has also changed his location and even turned off his reputations.

If I am wrong I apologise and hopefully he gets the pictures back up

As a homage to GV if you guys are wrong and he is coming back, or something positive to remember him by otherwise, here is a poorly drawn sketch of his idea.

What a dreary episode.

Of course, he has the prerogative to delete all his pics; might even be needed for any of us if the storage limit is reached. In most jurisdictions, copyright attaches to the image and text only, and occurs without registration. I don't think [F&E's] sketch violates copyright; none of his pics illustrated that view IIRC.

BUT, the toothpaste is out of the tube, and the idea itself has no protection after disclosure without filing for a patent. Even after issuance of a patent, again in most jurisdictions, private use for non-commercial purposes is a valid defence against an infringement action. Google relevant terms for insight.

Looks like the idea is fair game, and cloning may be allowed under the proper circumstances. Note: I'm not a lawyer, and I don't play one on television; but I have stayed at Holiday Inn Express.

He might not like it, but he's gotten a double lesson in intellectual property concepts.

Joe

G'Day Joe

Seeing the other bloke has left I thought I would use this spot to direct people to a interesting site http://www.beammachine.com/

Cheers
Bernie

Originally Posted by joe greiner

BUT, the toothpaste is out of the tube, and the idea itself has no protection after disclosure without filing for a patent. Even after issuance of a patent, again in most jurisdictions, private use for non-commercial purposes is a valid defence against an infringement action. Google relevant terms for insight.

Looks like the idea is fair game, and cloning may be allowed under the proper circumstances. Note: I'm not a lawyer, and I don't play one on television; but I have stayed at Holiday Inn Express.

He might not like it, but he's gotten a double lesson in intellectual property concepts.

Joe

All what Joe writes is true. Especially in there when someone introduces an invention before studying it's protection and possibilities to obtain IPR ownership. Only thing where I would put a remark is that there is more descriptive ways to announce the nature of the situation than "toothpaste out of the tube".

If the original poster took the pics away because of sudden wake-up to apply for a patent, the fact is that anyone who has those pictures (BTW I did not see them) can shoot down the filed patent if it can be strongly enough proved that those pics are from earlier publication than the patent. It just is so.

Now, the inventor may still try to proceed by applying for so called utility patent, but it is much weaker than the actual application patent would have been. In many countries, there is no way to apply for a patent based on readily published descriptions because of the demand of the concept of absolute novelty. In an case of private person, in practice this demand has to be fulfilled well enough. For a major business enterprise, there is unfortunately other ways to handle with these things.

The thing works otherways, too, nobody else can patent the exact content of those pics, but the problem is then there that there may be a team of experienced engineers providing some extra ideas, doing some R&D a bit and then the thing is protected based on that. It is now a novelty, including the properties readily seen.

All those patent officials I have talked with would do one thing: ban all the search engines, and if not completely, at least their caches. Those cache memory storages will keep different types of files for a long time. I have found for example price lists, gone from the originating site years ago.

As far as I know, I do not work for IKEA, but I can't really say it for sure. I mean, today I put something on display here, and a couple of months later it can be found in large quantities from the shelves of some big store. You'll never know. To me it would be a matter of ROTLF, to some other it would be something else.

Despite of this, I'll keep on posting if I got something worth posting.

sumu

Originally Posted by BANNED

The final 4 pics

no pics when I read thread (and other sad looks)

Sumu, the "double lesson" referred to a situation that arose in another forum or thread before you joined, and seems to have escalated to what we have now. I don't think he intended to apply for a patent, but the question of morality came up after the fact. Also, note that, according to my imperfect understanding, US patent law differs slightly from other jurisdictions regarding filing versus disclosure; now brought into more exact conformance.

IIRC, of all patents granted, only about 1 or 2% ever generate commercial gain; and even in those cases, the patent itself is good for only about 10% of the value. The rest comes from production enhancements, proper marketing and such. Those values can be added without patent protection.

In USA, the utility patent is stronger. The design patent covers only the exterior appearance, and you could drive a truck through all the loopholes.

Joe

Oh man, I clearly missed the point like with 180 degrees . I checked out the thread more carefully, and "there" it was. Right. Apologies!

IT's just that I have seen such a situation twice before, a guy presents his invention, and then suddenly silence, posts gone. Later on it was found out that in both cases they tried to apply for patent, but failed because of those public discussions.

I hope I did not mess up, and I hope this fellow comes back. There is never too much good innovations, nor fellows.

Originally Posted by joe greiner

In USA, the utility patent is stronger. The design patent covers only the exterior appearance, and you could drive a truck through all the loopholes.

Joe

I see I failed here, too. That's what I really ment, the design patent. Utility patent is indeed very strong. Argh! (primal finnish scream when hitting the head against a hard Carelian pine)

Not my day today...

Kippis,

sumu

If you want the pictures, look in your Temporary Internet Files... they are probably still there.

I found them in mine.
If you want to know how to locate them, just pm me.

Given that I was partially responsible for the mess, by posting a sketch as a well intentioned but maybe in some respects inflaming memento, I feel I should add a bit of explanation. I have patents of both types to my name, all in the 98% category and am pretty sure that protection of intellectual property was never the issue here. I was paying homage to the cleverness of the home made execution, the concept is not IMHO sufficiently innovative to be patentable anyway.

It is in the very nature of a forum to be a place for sharing ideas. That's why I show mine and many others show theirs here without any ulterior motive. The intellectual satisfaction (vanity?) is the same as with obtaining useless patents and it costs nothing.

Actually, now that I think of it: I had forgotten a couple of "woody' ones, I could post them here to satisfy my vanity!