back to article Never mind the patent trolls. Here's a riddle: What about the inventors?

The mania for hoverboards is causing an outbreak of painful patent ignorance, says a top litigator. EIP’s Matthew Jones, who has litigated in tech and pharma cases, highlights the seizure of a Chinese hoverboard maker’s wares at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas this month as an example. Changzhou makes the “Surfing …

  1. Dave 126 Silver badge

    So, what's the invention shown in the image?

    Please, do tell!

    https://regmedia.co.uk/2016/01/13/patent_fig539_cap.jpg?x=1200&y=794 Shows the whole picture, without the top being truncated.

    As far as I can make out, it is a cross between a tend and a bomb shelter, so would appreciate some clarification!

    Ta

    1. Bc1609

      Re: So, what's the invention shown in the image?

      A quick google shows that it's a portable nuclear shield. The chap looks so glum because everyone he knows has just died due to their lamentable of foresight in not carrying such a shield with them at all times.

    2. TeeCee Gold badge
      Coat

      Re: So, what's the invention shown in the image?

      I believe that's an early patent filed by Vault-Tec.....

    3. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken

      Re: So, what's the invention shown in the image?

      I think it is some sort of fallout shelter (from the cold war days), probably a portable one. Somehow I have the feeling I've seen this before in the early 1980ies. Anyway, it reminds me of the 'Protect & Survive' brochures from that era.

      The guy in the picture is not using a mobile phone, he is just waiting for the blast wave miraculously missing him, and the fallout settling.

      1. JustNiz

        Re: So, what's the invention shown in the image?

        I guess it saves a lot of effort if you can convince future fallout victims to already pre-bury themselves. When the guy inevitably dies from radiation, all they have to do now is fill in the hole.

    4. ZargTheDestroyer
      Mushroom

      Re: So, what's the invention shown in the image?

      a google image search found this:

      http://www.google.com/patents/US4625468

      Temporary/portable nuclear fallout shelter - Nice!

    5. Mike-H

      Re: So, what's the invention shown in the image?

      Portable nuclear shield

      http://list25.com/25-strangest-patents-ever-filed/

      (thank you google reverse image search)

    6. The Man Who Fell To Earth Silver badge
      Boffin

      Re: So, what's the invention shown in the image?

      It's United States Patent 4625468, "Temporary/portable nuclear fallout shelter".

      http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4625468.pdf

  2. The Man Who Fell To Earth Silver badge
    Boffin

    Patent Acquisition and Assertion by a (Non-Inventor) First Party Against a Second Party

    I can believe that patent trolling is a mostly American pass time.

    My favorite in this regard is a patent application (Application 20080270152) by a Halliburton Patent Attorney to patent the business model of patent trolling.

    The guy must have a wicked sense of humor.

    http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20080270152.pdf

    1. Filippo Silver badge

      Re: Patent Acquisition and Assertion by a (Non-Inventor) First Party Against a Second Party

      Brilliant. They can now patent troll the patent trolls for patent trolling.

  3. This post has been deleted by its author

  4. Peter Simpson 1
    Unhappy

    Background on the image?

    The poor guy doesn't look to happy.

  5. Zot

    The patent Office - a great big mother cow surround by ravenous lawyers.

    They don't protect your invention, look into whether it actually works, or even look to see if it's been done before. They just take the money and make a lot of business for lawyers and patent writers. It all sounds like a scam. And don't get me started on software patents...

    1. NotBob

      Unfortunately, it's been that way for some time.

      http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20030228

  6. 2460 Something
    Unhappy

    Sad Reality

    It doesn't really matter whether you are the inventor or patent troll or infringer. When it comes to patents, the only ones who truly win are the lawyers.

  7. Daggerchild Silver badge
    Childcatcher

    Predator. Prey.

    To solve large problems you will need powerful tools. Birthing such power attracts predators. The predators are experienced in combat and highly evolved. The prey is not, and cannot even run.

    China has meshed networks of maker-peers who conceive, invent and sell first and worry about IP laws later. The future can only be theirs. Our peering links instead expose inventors to claims of copying IP. *sigh*

    If I ever write some of the things I want to invent, I'll probably need to start them behind Tor if I want to finish them.

  8. David Nash Silver badge

    Legal fees

    I still find it hard to understand how, in the US system, someone can sue you and lose, and you still have to pay. How can they justify that? At least in the UK loser pays both fees.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Legal fees

      It is intended to benefit the large corporations, for whom legal fees are small change, and dissuade individuals and small companies from defending themselves. I know it is getting tired to call the US system "fascism", but in the technical sense of a society in which the government runs the country in conjunction with corporations, that's exactly what it is.

      "Small government" Republicans are never opposed to large corporations.

    2. MonkeyCee

      Re: Legal fees

      My experience of the UK patent courts is that the loser will eventually re-pay the fees. The claimants have to actually front up with the cash, usually for years sometimes decades before they see their money returned.

      The family member who was in the patent dispute ended up selling his patent to a company that was a rival of the infringing company. They even gave him a reasonable deal, considering they had him over a barrel.

  9. ralph058

    Use existing laws

    There is an existing PTO rule that states roughly, use or lose it. To get a renewal of a patent, you need to demonstrate that the owner of the patent is reducing it to practice. This is given a wink and a nod by PTO. They need to require documentation of it either having been comercialized for each claim or to provide a record of reduction to practice.

    A second factor is the looseness of some examiners on specifics in the claims. Patent lawyers write the patent application in generalized terms. Claims need to be more specific.

    Patent suits need to be reviewed by a panel of persons knowledgeable in the arts being challenged. and they need to be able to set aside patents if appropriate. This alone would inhibit a lot of suits. I file a frivolous challenge and lose my patent.

    Finally, in sue happy US, the winner always has the right to sue to recover loses for a case. There is plenty of case law to support it. A few big companies stick it out with a few trials, challenge on active reduction to practice, and then sue to recover triple damages. Quite the inhibitor.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like