Re: Attribution is not required in public domain materials

From: Joseph Pietro Riolo <riolo[_at_]voicenet.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 15:42:39 -0400

On Sun, 22 Jun 2003, Keith Tabor <ket354[_at_]yahoo.com> wrote:

>

> Well, no, it is actually quite right. Ideas are not
> patentable but they are protectable through the patent
> system. In other words, if you have a new, useful, and
> nonobvious idea you will look to the patent system to
> protect that idea. You will not claim the idea, you
> will draft claims consistent with the previously
> quoted statute that adequately protect your idea. The
> distinction is where the money is if you draft patents
> for a living.

The word "idea" appeared in the above paragraph five times. What is your definition of "idea" then?

> I guess it is just a matter of symantecs, but this is
> a pretty literate group so I didn't think this should
> be overlooked.

It is not a matter of semantics. The law is pretty clear that utility patent covers only process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. To say that ideas are patentable or protectable is a serious misconception.

Finally, at:

     http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/doc/general/index.html

here is the quotation found under the question "What Can Be Patented":

     A patent cannot be obtained upon a mere idea or
     suggestion. The patent is granted upon the new
     machine, manufacture, etc., as has been said, and
     not upon the idea or suggestion of the new machine.
     A complete description of the actual machine or
     other subject matter for which a patent is sought
     is required.

Joseph Pietro Riolo
<riolo[_at_]voicenet.com>
http://www.boycottcopyright.com

Number of days left until 1-1-2019 when all knowledge of 1923 in the land of the U.S.A. will be freed from their copyright owners' prisons: 5,668

Public domain notice: I put all of my expressions in this post in the public domain. Received on Thu Jun 26 2003 - 23:42:39 GMT