Re: beamsplitter patented

[P3D Michael Kersenbrock <michaelk@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> >I've done patent searches for spitters, and the descriptions all sound 
> >just like every splitter ever made.  Unless these are all design patents, 
> >I also don't understand how they can be patented. 

Patents also are only actually valid when used successfully a court case.  With 
the volume that the patent office handles, and the technical expertise
that the patent office requires (and probably doesn't have in quantity... 
people with sufficient expertise probably could earn a lot more money 
working for private industry), patents aren't always fully examined
to the detail that a court case would.

I know that I've read newly issued patents that seem to patent
design techniques that I've used for twenty years (which makes
them invalid patents... and I doubt that I had invented it twenty
years prior).

A patent doesn't make all long-time existing users of it 
illegal, it's the other way around.  The advantage to having
the patent is that the burden of proof is on the "others"
to prove the patent invalid.


Mike K.


P.S. - No, I'm not a patent lawyer, but I once took a class from
       one (and talked to the ones that wrote up my measly two patents).

P.P.S. -   Happy New Year to all!!!!!!!


------------------------------