Patent awarded to 8-year-old boy for new way of swinging on a swing
November 3, 2003 10:22 AM Subscribe
On April 9th of last year, the U.S. Patent Office awarded a patent to a 8-year-old boy for: "The Method of Swinging on a Swing". There is even a techinical diagram. Where will the USPTO draw the line for new patent applications? At this rate, there will be a patent for exercizing your cat.
This post was deleted for the following reason: posted previously
I'm interested in obtaining a patent myself. Anyone have any good links for how to go about it?
posted by banished at 10:26 AM on November 3, 2003
posted by banished at 10:26 AM on November 3, 2003
From the description:
Lastly, it should be noted that because pulling alternately on one chain and then the other resembles in some measure the movements one would use to swing from vines in a dense jungle forest, the swinging method of the present invention may be referred to by the present inventor and his sister as "Tarzan" swinging. The user may even choose to produce a Tarzan-type yell while swinging in the manner described, which more accurately replicates swinging on vines in a dense jungle forest. Actual jungle forestry is not required.
Something tells me an 8-year-old boy wouldn't have such a well-developed sense of humor.
posted by pardonyou? at 10:27 AM on November 3, 2003
Lastly, it should be noted that because pulling alternately on one chain and then the other resembles in some measure the movements one would use to swing from vines in a dense jungle forest, the swinging method of the present invention may be referred to by the present inventor and his sister as "Tarzan" swinging. The user may even choose to produce a Tarzan-type yell while swinging in the manner described, which more accurately replicates swinging on vines in a dense jungle forest. Actual jungle forestry is not required.
Something tells me an 8-year-old boy wouldn't have such a well-developed sense of humor.
posted by pardonyou? at 10:27 AM on November 3, 2003
You go about it by hiring a patent agent/patent attorney. It is not something you should even attempt on your own.
posted by anathema at 10:33 AM on November 3, 2003
posted by anathema at 10:33 AM on November 3, 2003
Something tells me an 8-year-old boy wouldn't have such a well-developed sense of humor.
Setting aside the absurdity of this particular patent for the moment, so what? Inventors aren't required to be the ones who actually write the patent description--they can and often do seek the services of a patent attorney or patent agent for such purposes.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 10:33 AM on November 3, 2003
Setting aside the absurdity of this particular patent for the moment, so what? Inventors aren't required to be the ones who actually write the patent description--they can and often do seek the services of a patent attorney or patent agent for such purposes.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 10:33 AM on November 3, 2003
The father of the 8-year-old is a patent attorney. The father should be sanctioned for filing frivolous patent claims and further clogging an extremely overworked PTO.
The PTO would have more resources (they are self-funding) but for Congress deciding to dip into the PTO kitty to use for other funding not having anything to do with the PTO.
Where will the USPTO draw the line for new patent applications?
Because a patent is issued does not make it enforceable. There are challenges to the validity of patents all the time in federal court.
posted by anathema at 10:54 AM on November 3, 2003
The PTO would have more resources (they are self-funding) but for Congress deciding to dip into the PTO kitty to use for other funding not having anything to do with the PTO.
Where will the USPTO draw the line for new patent applications?
Because a patent is issued does not make it enforceable. There are challenges to the validity of patents all the time in federal court.
posted by anathema at 10:54 AM on November 3, 2003
Cats are not characteristically disposed toward voluntary aerobic exercise. It becomes the burden of the cat owner to create situations of sufficient interest to the feline to induce even short-lived and modest exertion for the health and well-being of the pet.
I thought William Gaddis was deceased.
posted by palancik at 10:57 AM on November 3, 2003
I thought William Gaddis was deceased.
posted by palancik at 10:57 AM on November 3, 2003
The father should be sanctioned for filing frivolous patent claims and further clogging an extremely overworked PTO.
I dunno, it depends on *why* he filed the patent. If he did it to prove how inane the patent system has become...then that's pretty darned funny. I mean, look at all the inane patents that Amazon has filed.
posted by dejah420 at 10:57 AM on November 3, 2003
I dunno, it depends on *why* he filed the patent. If he did it to prove how inane the patent system has become...then that's pretty darned funny. I mean, look at all the inane patents that Amazon has filed.
posted by dejah420 at 10:57 AM on November 3, 2003
Setting aside the absurdity of this particular patent for the moment, so what?
I wasn't actually making a substantive point. I just thought it was a funny line. I particularly liked "Actual jungle forestry not required."
And anathema, I agree that this is a frivolous patent. But from reading the description, I don't think it was intended seriously. Which begs the question: Why was it filed? To make a statement? If so, what's the message?
posted by pardonyou? at 10:59 AM on November 3, 2003
I wasn't actually making a substantive point. I just thought it was a funny line. I particularly liked "Actual jungle forestry not required."
And anathema, I agree that this is a frivolous patent. But from reading the description, I don't think it was intended seriously. Which begs the question: Why was it filed? To make a statement? If so, what's the message?
posted by pardonyou? at 10:59 AM on November 3, 2003
My guess the patent attorney wanted to bond with his 8-year-old and working 70 hours a week drafting patent claims wasn't enough for him. ;-)
posted by anathema at 11:05 AM on November 3, 2003
posted by anathema at 11:05 AM on November 3, 2003
I remember reading about this last year. As a patent attorney, Peter Olson was trying to demonstrate to his son how patents are issued. Doesn't seem to be any political agenda.
posted by sharpener at 11:13 AM on November 3, 2003
posted by sharpener at 11:13 AM on November 3, 2003
Because a patent is issued does not make it enforceable. There are challenges to the validity of patents all the time in federal court.
No, but the fact that a patent is issued does place the burden of proof on those who would seek to invalidate it. The fact that a patent grant is not an ultimate, unreversible decision does not mean that the patent examiners shouldn't seek to give an application the best examination possible--or that we, as citizens and thus as the ultimate overseers of government, should sit silently by when the decisions of the USPTO seem to be in contravention of common sense. (As an analogy, just because the verdict in a criminal trial can be appealed, doesn't mean a jury should simply flip a coin to determine the verdict.) So omidius's question remains a valid one.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 11:21 AM on November 3, 2003
No, but the fact that a patent is issued does place the burden of proof on those who would seek to invalidate it. The fact that a patent grant is not an ultimate, unreversible decision does not mean that the patent examiners shouldn't seek to give an application the best examination possible--or that we, as citizens and thus as the ultimate overseers of government, should sit silently by when the decisions of the USPTO seem to be in contravention of common sense. (As an analogy, just because the verdict in a criminal trial can be appealed, doesn't mean a jury should simply flip a coin to determine the verdict.) So omidius's question remains a valid one.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 11:21 AM on November 3, 2003
Agreed. My main point is that the PTO's resources are stretched very thing and they are dependent upon Congress for their funding scheme. Don't even get me started on software patents.
posted by anathema at 11:27 AM on November 3, 2003
posted by anathema at 11:27 AM on November 3, 2003
At this rate, there will be a patent for exercizing your cat.
Anybody know anything about exorcising a cat?
It is not something you should even attempt on your own.
Nonsense. I did it myself, using this book.
You should also know that if you file a pro se application with patentable content as a small entity, the USPTO must assist you with completing the application successfully.
posted by ZenMasterThis at 11:30 AM on November 3, 2003
Anybody know anything about exorcising a cat?
It is not something you should even attempt on your own.
Nonsense. I did it myself, using this book.
You should also know that if you file a pro se application with patentable content as a small entity, the USPTO must assist you with completing the application successfully.
posted by ZenMasterThis at 11:30 AM on November 3, 2003
As a patent attorney, Peter Olson was trying to demonstrate to his son how patents are issued.
If so, it's a pretty expensive lesson. If I'm reading the fee schedule right, this would have cost somewhere around $1200. (Basic filing fee - utility, mutiple dependent claim, & utility issue fee, with the small entity fees applying. Yes, this is the fee schedule for FY2004, and the fees in 2000 would have been somewhat less, but not much.)
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 11:31 AM on November 3, 2003
If so, it's a pretty expensive lesson. If I'm reading the fee schedule right, this would have cost somewhere around $1200. (Basic filing fee - utility, mutiple dependent claim, & utility issue fee, with the small entity fees applying. Yes, this is the fee schedule for FY2004, and the fees in 2000 would have been somewhat less, but not much.)
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 11:31 AM on November 3, 2003
If so, it's a pretty expensive lesson.
True. But sometimes kids make you discard logic when it comes to spending habits (I spoil my kid occasionally, even though he doesn't always deserve it). Besides, Peter Olson is a lawyer - probably making some decent coin ;-)
posted by sharpener at 11:46 AM on November 3, 2003
True. But sometimes kids make you discard logic when it comes to spending habits (I spoil my kid occasionally, even though he doesn't always deserve it). Besides, Peter Olson is a lawyer - probably making some decent coin ;-)
posted by sharpener at 11:46 AM on November 3, 2003
I didn't say you couldn't do it on your own, I said you shouldn't do it on your own. Nice work, by the way. I'm impressed.
posted by anathema at 12:06 PM on November 3, 2003
posted by anathema at 12:06 PM on November 3, 2003
WHen this lad "discovers himself" in a few years, do you think he'll patent his technique?
posted by jmgorman at 12:07 PM on November 3, 2003
posted by jmgorman at 12:07 PM on November 3, 2003
password: Indeed. For those interested, here's the previous MeFi discussion.
posted by macrone at 12:29 PM on November 3, 2003
posted by macrone at 12:29 PM on November 3, 2003
Flahback! Settle made an appearance in that thread.
posted by anathema at 12:59 PM on November 3, 2003
posted by anathema at 12:59 PM on November 3, 2003
« Older Economists in hell. | I can only dream of growing his beard. Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by omidius at 10:23 AM on November 3, 2003