EDA DesignLine Blog
Comment
Duane Benson
The nice thing about the cost of disk storage these days, as well as the speed ...
David Brown
I don't think there are /any/ existing patent systems with are functional for ...
What were they thinking: backups and patents
Brian Bailey
8/31/2012 10:37 AM EDT
The patent system is certainly back in the spotlight these days and high profile cases such as Apple-Samsung are sure to create a lot more debate about it. One thing I find amusing, based on the comments placed on articles about the case, is how many people think the jury should have ignored the patent system and done what was right – or in other words, it was really the patent system that was on trial and not if one side copied the patented materials of the other. For this blog entry I thought I would talk about the failure of the patent office to actually put backup systems in place and the impact that this had.
In 1790, the patent office was created and Samuel Hopkins became the first person to receive a patent for an improved method of making Pot Ash. The patent system became quite popular and by 1936 approximately 9957 patents had been issued. How come we don’t know exactly how many? Well, they decided that the patents were being stored in a way that was not very fireproof and that a better facility should be built. So, the patents were moved to a temporary storage facility that was right next door to the fire station.
Well, you know what happened next – right. In December 15th 1936 the building went up in flames and the fire brigade could do nothing because all of the pumps and hoses were frozen. They sat and watched all the records go up in flames – and no they had no backups, nor did they have a list of the patents that had been issued. They tried to recreate the archive by getting copies from the inventors but only 2800 were restored. Also because patents were given a name rather than a number, they started numbering from 1 and gave the restored patents an X after the number. This led to some patents being assigned fractional numbers, such as 1536½ X.
Even recently one of the original lost patents has been found and restored.
So, patent number 1 (in the new numbering system) belongs to Senator John Ruggles of Maine for a cog mechanism for locomotive wheels issued July 13th 1836.
When was the last time you did a backup?
Other recent What were they thinking entries
Apple, Google, Oracle and Samsung dueling
A use for body piercingBrian Bailey – keeping you covered
If you found this article to be of interest, visit EDA Designline where 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).
|
|
|
|
|
David Brown
9/5/2012 4:45 AM EDT
You might like to note in your article that it was the first /American/ patent office that opened in 1790, it was the /American/ patent office that burned down, and so on. And it is the /American/ patent system that was "on trial", and that is so badly broken.
Looking beyond your own navel, you can see Apple losing to Samsung in almost identical cases in different courts around the world. Most countries' patent systems are broken - partly due to giving in to American pressure to follow their system and accept their patents - but few are quite as badly broken as the American system. Most countries' civil courts systems also have big problems, but few are as badly broken as in the USA (where you have a law system, but not a "justice" system).
Here's hoping that at least some people in the USA will realise that they are a small part of a big world, and it pays to lift your head and look around. There they will see how the rest of the world alternates between laughing at the American patent and court system, or crying about it, or simply feeling sorry for the poor sods who have to live with that mess.
Sign in to Reply
Spice
9/15/2012 12:00 PM EDT
Just curious which patent system is the most functional? It seems that the patent trolls are abusing all of the systems and due to differing legal systems making it difficult to standardize the patent system. But it appears that the US is working to bring our patent system into alignment with other systems on March 16, 2013. Whether or not this will actually improve the system we must wait and see.
Sign in to Reply
David Brown
9/16/2012 4:17 AM EDT
I don't think there are /any/ existing patent systems with are functional for modern technology.
There are three main reasons why patents are a bigger problem in the US than other countries. The first is that the US allows patents on more things - such as patenting a black rectangle as a shape for a phone, and software patents.
The second is that in the US there is a poor implementation of their patent system. Did you know that in the US, patent offices get budgets based on the number of patents they award - not for the work they are supposed to do? The assumption in the US is that the applicant is telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth about the eligibility of the patent and prior art. The idea is that if they should not have the patent (either due to a mistake, or by deception), then someone will challenge it in court and it will be overthrown. Which brings us to the final point...
In the US legal system, in almost all business vs. business civil cases, the company willing to spend the most money will win.
This combines to make patents in the USA into a club that companies can legally buy to beat protection money out of other companies.
You ask what would be a better patent system? For most areas, /no/ patents would be much better. Copyrights and trade marks are good enough protection. Dropping patents would greatly reduce the costs of companies developing new products.
There are a few areas where something more is needed, such as in medical research - but patents are not the answer there either.
Sign in to Reply
Duane Benson
9/16/2012 9:17 PM EDT
The nice thing about the cost of disk storage these days, as well as the speed of USB 3.0, is that, in my opinion, now is the first time in a long time that personal back up is viable.
There have always been back up systems, but most have been unwieldy to the point that they just were not practical unless a discipline IT department was in charge.
I've been using computers since the early 1980's, and though I did my best to keep important files backed up, today's 1TB USB 3.0 external drive is the first system that I've felt like I could use without hassle, and take with me when traveling.
Sign in to Reply