Re: Apple II vs Atari 800

["Michael J. Mahon" <mjmahon@aol.com>]

Rick Cortese wrote:
> Michael J. Mahon wrote:
>
> > Rick Cortese wrote:
> >
> > > Michael J. Mahon wrote:
> > >
> > > > Rick Cortese wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > <snip>
> > >
> > > > Actually, the limitation is that the patent application must be *filed*
> > > > prior to public disclosure.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I have two friends that are patent lawyers, well one died on me 
> > > recently, and they have both told me otherwise. More along the lines 
> > > of the patent *is* the disclosure that you are getting exclusive 
> > > rights because of. Once any public disclosure is made, the patent 
> > > office well see no need to give you any rights to reveal how you did 
> > > something.
> >
> >
> >
> > Not so, assuming he was talking about the US.
>
>
> We are talking about the USA.
>
> You obviously have a misconception about the language used.
>
>  From the US Patent/trademark web page
> http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/doc/general/index.html#patent
>
> In order for an invention to be patentable it must be new as defined in 
> the patent law, which provides that an invention cannot be patented if: 
> �(a) the invention was known or used by others in this country, or 
> patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign 
> country, before the invention thereof by the applicant for patent,� or 
> �(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in 
> this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country 
> more than one year prior to the application for patent in the United 
> States . . .�

There you have it--exactly as I was saying!

Obviously publication cannot preceed the *invention* (unless you were
perhaps publishing about a time machine ;-), but it can precede the
*patent application* by one year.

> > In most countries, publication closes the door to application, but
> > in the US it starts a 1 year clock.
>
>
> No. It is either [described]<immediate grounds for not granting>, [in 
> public use]<immediate grounds for not granting>, *OR* [*SOLD*... for a 
> year].

Remember, we're talking about publication *by the inventor*, so there's
no issue about the invention not being novel as a consequence of the
publication.

Clearly if someone *other* than the inventor published the invention
prior to the "inventor" filing, that would bar the patent, since the
filer did not invent anything novel.  This has no bearing on publication
by the actual inventor or his agent.

-michael

NadaPong: Network game demo for Apple II computers!
Home page:  http://members.aol.com/MJMahon/

"The wastebasket is our most important design
tool--and it's seriously underused."