 | | Re: Lego Protocol Patent —Kekoa Proudfoot
|
| | | (...) I agree with everything you've said, Ralph. My turn to say somthing about patents. I know the job of being a patent clerk must be amazingly difficult -- how can any person possibly know about enough prior art to tell the obvious from the (...) (25 years ago, 3-Nov-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Lego Protocol Patent —Dave Baum
|
| | | | (...) In theory, patents are only allowed for inventions that are "novel and unique". This means that if someone trained in a given field, with access to all published literature and knowledge, when faced with the same problem could reasonably be (...) (25 years ago, 4-Nov-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Lego Protocol Patent —Chris Phillips
|
| | | | (...) I agree. But I'm pretty sure that a patent only prevents someone else from doing everything mentioned in _all_ of the claims put together. For example, if I were granted a patent containing two claims: 1. Walking 2. Chewing gum. ...then I (...) (25 years ago, 4-Nov-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Lego Protocol Patent —Paul Speed
|
| | | | (...) Not true. Each claim acts as its own mini-patent. For an accessible article and discussion, check out: (URL) the comments section make sure to set it sort high moderation scores to the top... otherwise it will take years to weed through. -Paul (...) (25 years ago, 4-Nov-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | |
