datasheets.com EBN.com EDN.com EETimes.com Embedded.com PlanetAnalog.com TechOnline.com  
Events
UBM Tech
UBM Tech

EDA DesignLine Blog

Comment


GordonScott

8/31/2012 5:44 AM EDT


Using the trade name "Velcro" in the patent seems like a mistake. So long ...

More...



BrianBailey

8/28/2012 9:09 PM EDT

So true, or toe socks...

More...

What were they thinking: sock wedgie

Brian Bailey

8/24/2012 12:52 PM EDT

OK, hands up anyone who has ever had a problem with their socks creeping between their toes. Now I know it happens with underwear every now and then – the classic wedgie, but have you ever had a toe wedgie? Can it even happen? Clearly Julius Burrell from California is afflicted with this condition so badly that he would be willing to buy special shoes and socks to help prevent this traumatic condition. He also believed that many other suffered his fate, so he patented (3,938,264) the idea of putting Velcro into the shoe and attaching some to the sock so that the sock could not move from its intended place. Let’s forget about the fact that this may make the shoe/sock combination quite uncomfortable and that you may require a shoe ½ size larger to make room for the Velcro.

Taken from the patent:

Having thus described the invention, what I claim as new and desire to secure by Letters Patent of the United States is:

  1. A shoe fitted with a section of Velcro material in the inside forward toe section of the shoe for the purpose of engaging the forward section of the sock of a wearer of the shoe, said Velcro material being fixed to a forward toe section of the shoe that is inclined generally perpendicular to the plane of the sole of the said shoe.
  2. The combination as recited in claim 1 together with a sock of a shape to completely enclose the portion of a foot, on which it is worn, within a shoe, said sock fitted with a section of Velcro material mounted externally of the forward toe section of the sock in a position to matingly engage the section of Velcro material located in the toe section of the shoe.

So, there is an end to the toe wedgie, but I wonder if it can be translated to underwear? Must check to see if anyone has patented that…


Brian Bailey – keeping you amused


If you found this article to be of interest, visit EDA Designline where – in addition to my blogs on all sorts of "stuff" – you will find the latest and greatest design, technology, product, and news articles with regard to all aspects of Electronic Design Automation (EDA).

Also, you can obtain a highlights update delivered directly to your inbox by signing up for the EDA Designline weekly newsletter – just Click Here to request this newsletter using the Manage Newsletters tab (if you aren't already a member you'll be asked to register, but it's free and painless so don't let that stop you [grin]).




ReneCardenas

8/24/2012 7:05 PM EDT

This is a good example of what is worng with the patenet system in force today, why grant a patent to an simple obvious change like that.

To be of merit, shouldn't be more than an obvious extension of present product or application?

Sign in to Reply



Bellhop

8/28/2012 4:04 PM EDT

I suppose that this inventor's not a prospect for "toe shoes".

Sign in to Reply



BrianBailey

8/28/2012 9:09 PM EDT

So true, or toe socks...

Sign in to Reply



SteveD_Aus

8/28/2012 7:54 PM EDT

I thought sock wedgies were only caused when wearing them with flip flops (thongs to Australians, but I'll go with flip flops since we are already discussing wedgies).

Anyways, the flip-flop-sock-wedgie is merely a sign that this combination should be avoided at all costs. Pity no one told my secondary school maths teacher!

Sign in to Reply



BrianBailey

8/28/2012 9:08 PM EDT

Well, that is why they make socks with separated toes, and as for the thongs - there is no way to avoid a wedgie with a thong!

Sign in to Reply



GordonScott

8/31/2012 5:44 AM EDT


Using the trade name "Velcro" in the patent seems like a mistake. So long as one doesn't use "Velcro" or something that infringes any applicable patent of theirs, I think this patent is worthless (or should be).

I may also have prior art with chewing gum :-)

Sign in to Reply



Please sign in to post comment

Navigate to related information

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)