P3D Patent

[Bob_Maxey@xxxxxxxxxxxx]

I have to put my two cents in on this one, it's one of my sore points.
Patents are issued with a complete disregard for their workability. There
is
no requirement to prove that an idea is workable or even sensible. In fact
the patent office is full of good ideas that could never be implemented.
Junk patents clog up the system and cause a lot of problems.


Certainly, I will defer to you on this...after all, I have never applied
for a patent. However, what specifically does the patent office mean when
they state that the invention MUST BE USEFUL (Their terms)? Common sense
would indicate that something that does not work is not useful and
therefore can't be patented. Where am I misunderstanding this little point?
I remember when it was a specific requirement that a model of the invention
be built before it could be patented. Has it changed this much? Are you
telling me that if I create an invention that makes it possible for you to
teach your Goldfish to speak Latin, or an invention that allows you to take
32 dimensional pictures, or any other insane idea, I can get a patent on
it? Time Travel does not work, and it is, I am sure unpatentable as is a
perpetual motion machine. If the Patent Office disallows these inventions,
why not others?

I like the patent discussion, so can we discuss these issues off list?

RM



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