Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] landmark patent case is a victory for innovation

[Mike Miller <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

On Tue, 1 May 2007, Jonathan King wrote:

> On 5/1/07, Mike Miller <EMAIL:PROTECTED> wrote:
>
> > On the other hand, it might be fun to come up with funny "use patents" 
> > and get them in the USPO database.  Let's see, how about "method of 
> > using a bowling ball to crack walnuts?"  "Method of using a vacuum 
> > cleaner to catch mice?"  I could go on.
>
> Dunno about the walnuts idea. But I wouldn't go catching mice using my 
> vacuum cleaner if I were you, thanks to patent 6,865,843:
>
> http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htm&r=1&p=1&f=G&l=50&d=PTXT&S1=6865843.PN.&OS=PN/6865843&RS=PN/6865843
>
> Tragically, this invention was patented in 2005. Also, it's a way more 
> clever idea than yours, since it involves bait and it is portable.


Yes, he did one better than me, for sure, but that was my off-the-cuff 
invention and I could have improved it.  I had already thought of using a 
motion detector.  I would say that use of bait is pretty obvious.  I might 
not have thought of making it in the shape of a cat.  I also didn't intend 
to suffocate the mouse, just trap it inside.

I have to say that it isn't all that great of an idea if I came up with 
the core concept off the top of my head when trying to create a really 
stupid invention.  So what did you do?  Search for "mouse AND vacuum" at 
USPO?

Mike

_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion