Perpetual Motion Patent; Bioslr
this in National Geographic News. On Nov 1 Boris Volfson of Huntington, Indiana, received the U.S. of A. Patent 6,960,975 for his blueprint of an antigravity infinite vehicle. Volfson's arts and crafts is theoretically powered yesteryear a superconductor shield that changes the space-time continuum inwards such a means that it defies gravity. The blueprint effectively creates a perpetual-motion machine, which physicists reckon an impossible device.
Robert Park, a consultant amongst the American Physical Society inwards Washington DC, warns that such dubious patents aren't express to the antigravity concept:
Perpetual-motion machines accept long held special appeal for inventors—particularly during the concept's heyday to a greater extent than or less the plow of the 20th century. Patent applications on such devices became thus numerous that yesteryear 1911 the patent constituent instituted a dominion that perpetual-motion auto concepts had to move accompanied yesteryear a model that could run inwards the constituent for a menstruum of i year.
likes patents for perpetual motion machines (though, embarassingly, he couldn't detect a link to this one). They shouldn't postulate to move expensive to test in i lawsuit yous rumble the concept, thus the patent constituent should instruct adept income from them. The inventor is happy because he's got his patent. The patent agent is happy because he gets his fees. Other manufacturers slumber soundly because, if the excogitation is opposite to the laws of nature, there's non much run a endangerment of infringing it. Merpel adds, there's non much sympathy for investors. They're prepared to sink a lot of coin each twelvemonth into patents that don't piece of occupation fifty-fifty if they're non opposite to the laws of nature; if they don't produce their due diligence, it's their ain fault.
Other patents yesteryear Boris Volfson here, here and here
2 Bio-Science Law Review
Issue iii of Lawtext's Bio-Science Law Review for 2004-5 has instantly been published.
Goodies inwards rather sparse number include a review yesteryear Gareth Morgan (Taylor Wessing) of the royalties dispute between Cambridge Antibody Technology (alias CAT) together with Abbott Laboratories that ended inwards victory for the triumphant licensor over move of its Humira product. There's every bit good a challenging slice yesteryear Wim Nauwelaerts (from the Brussels constituent of Hogan together with Hartson) entitled: "Whose deoxyribonucleic acid is it Anyway? Testing Genetics Under the Auspices of European Union Data Privacy Law" - a novel slant to an quondam problem, the IPKat thinks.
Robert Park, a consultant amongst the American Physical Society inwards Washington DC, warns that such dubious patents aren't express to the antigravity concept:
"I mightiness take away heed a electrical charge nearly a item patent, together with and then I await into it. More oft than non it's a screwball patent. It's an quondam problem, simply it has gotten worse inwards the concluding few years. The workload of the patent constituent has gone upwardly enormously."Some people mightiness reckon patents on unworkable products to move relatively harmless. Park, a physics professor at the University of Maryland at College Park, disagrees.
"The problem, of course, it that this deceives a lot of investors. You can't become out together with detect investors for a novel excogitation until yous tin forcefulness out come upwardly up amongst a patent to demo that if yous lay all this coin into a concept, soul else can't bag the idea. [Approving these form of patents can] enter easier for scam artists to con people if they tin forcefulness out instruct patents for screwball ideas."
Perpetual-motion machines accept long held special appeal for inventors—particularly during the concept's heyday to a greater extent than or less the plow of the 20th century. Patent applications on such devices became thus numerous that yesteryear 1911 the patent constituent instituted a dominion that perpetual-motion auto concepts had to move accompanied yesteryear a model that could run inwards the constituent for a menstruum of i year.likes patents for perpetual motion machines (though, embarassingly, he couldn't detect a link to this one). They shouldn't postulate to move expensive to test in i lawsuit yous rumble the concept, thus the patent constituent should instruct adept income from them. The inventor is happy because he's got his patent. The patent agent is happy because he gets his fees. Other manufacturers slumber soundly because, if the excogitation is opposite to the laws of nature, there's non much run a endangerment of infringing it. Merpel adds, there's non much sympathy for investors. They're prepared to sink a lot of coin each twelvemonth into patents that don't piece of occupation fifty-fifty if they're non opposite to the laws of nature; if they don't produce their due diligence, it's their ain fault.
Other patents yesteryear Boris Volfson here, here and here
2 Bio-Science Law ReviewIssue iii of Lawtext's Bio-Science Law Review for 2004-5 has instantly been published.
Goodies inwards rather sparse number include a review yesteryear Gareth Morgan (Taylor Wessing) of the royalties dispute between Cambridge Antibody Technology (alias CAT) together with Abbott Laboratories that ended inwards victory for the triumphant licensor over move of its Humira product. There's every bit good a challenging slice yesteryear Wim Nauwelaerts (from the Brussels constituent of Hogan together with Hartson) entitled: "Whose deoxyribonucleic acid is it Anyway? Testing Genetics Under the Auspices of European Union Data Privacy Law" - a novel slant to an quondam problem, the IPKat thinks.
Comments
Post a Comment