chemrox - 18-10-2007 at 22:59
Another member and I were talking about whether patents are worthwhile for learning preparations. I had supposed that all patents and certainly US
patents had to be proved to be granted. Is this not the case? What testing of patents if any are done? If there is no testing, what can be learned
from them with any degree of confidence?
Thanks for any information you may have,
CRX
[Edited on 18-10-2007 by chemrox]
12AX7 - 18-10-2007 at 23:18
Pffsh... sure as hell ain't any more. The U.S. Patent Office is a joke. Older patents, back when they gave a damn, would be more reliable (10, 20,
50 years ago???).
For example, there are plenty perpetual motion / overunity machines on the books right now.
Tim
Sauron - 19-10-2007 at 00:57
Replicability and peer review have never been required under US patent law. Patent lawyers and their clients have always hidden behind the notorious
"skilled in the art" language. The invention must be non-obvious improvement, nonobvious to those skilled in the particular (and often highly
specialized) art.
So if thee and me cannot replicate we are simply deemed to be insufficiently skilled in the art.
Ask rosco_bodine
BTW how many members actually HAVE any patents? Therefore have actually been through the process of working with a patent attorney or attorneys and
getting a patent application through the system and patent issued? I have a current US patent, a Chilean patent, and European patent in five EU
countries now lapsed. Obviously I can't disclose the patent numbers without making my own identity known, which is hardly in my interest or consistent
with the nature and policy of the forum, is it?
I am quite sure I'm hardly the only patentee on the forum. Everyone else will be in the same boat though.
[Edited on 19-10-2007 by Sauron]
Tacho - 19-10-2007 at 03:18
Sauron,
Brazil follows a patent system that is very different from the US. Probably based on some European law.
Here is how it works, explained in a very informal way:
1- You just go there and "deposit" your idea. You must follow the legal language and description rules (prior patents, state of the art etc.).
Checking existing patents is highly reccomended, but not necessary. This step is cheap and quick, but already grants you the priority rights.
2- You then have to wait a period. If memory serves me well is 18 months. IF (and only if) you fell your rights have been violated during this
period, you can ask (and pay) for an immediate accessment.
3- After this period, IF (and only if) you feel your patent is still worth the trouble, you can ask (and pay) for a full patent accessment.
This process eliminates the need of analysing all the "opportunity" patents, but keeps the inventor's rights, in case he really needs them.
jokull - 19-10-2007 at 05:36
Hi, I recently got a patent in Mexico
The procedure they have is very similar to that described by Tacho, but 18 months after your patent request had been revised they may ask you for some
explaining details.
If it is the case then you have 2 months to answer, otherwise your request is regarded as declined.
If they don't ask explanations, then you get the patent within 30 months (I think this is excesive!) after your request.
Morgan - 14-6-2016 at 06:03
What a sad state of affairs.
The Patent Scam Intro
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sG9UMMq2dz4
aga - 14-6-2016 at 08:37
Patents are as random as something you randomly find on the internet.
They might contain enough information to derive a process, they might be complete crap.
Patents only exist to generate $, not to actually help anyone other than lawyers.
Possibly the patent holder, but mostly the lawyers.
Morgan - 14-6-2016 at 18:21
Shell companies hide behind fake addresses in abandoned office spaces and the cases cost about 3 million dollars to defend. So people end up settling
out of court and if you do counter sue ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sG9UMMq2dz4#t=15m49s
This was particularly troubling, the father and son connections.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sG9UMMq2dz4#t=4m49s
"Hopped in my single engine airplane and went there ..."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sG9UMMq2dz4#t=8m50s
[Edited on 15-6-2016 by Morgan]
NEMO-Chemistry - 18-6-2016 at 08:07
Are patents world wide or just the country you file them in? I have nothing to patent but wondered how much do they cost? Seems odd to pay for
something like a patent if your invention dosnt work??
morganbw - 18-6-2016 at 13:09
I have found many to be okay. You do have to remember that most(or at least a lot) of reactions per say are only optimized with very specific reaction
conditions. When the patent says those who understand the art (from my take and my experience is that the reaction conditions are critical). If you
are not in that industry, well, you may not be able to replicate.
zed - 25-6-2016 at 13:44
Well, back in the old days, me and some of the other fellers down at the general store, usta compare notes. Conclusion? The procedures outlined in
many patents, just don't work. Bogus! AND, that was then. Now, I read patents that are so general and of such broad scope, they seem to be
gibberish. Plus, they don't work!
Next... Patents are not World Wide. If someone, somewhere, decides to not respect your patent rights, there may be very little you can do.
Recently, India refused to grant patent protection for the drug Harvoni. This forced the (criminal?) corporation that owns the U.S. patent, to
negotiate a reasonable consumer price structure in India. The drug isn't easy to make, but big Pharma can probably punch 'em out for about a buck a
pill. By the time the U.S. consumer gets 'em, they sell for over $1000.00 U.S. per pill. So, the price stateside is over $100,000 for 12 weeks
supply of pills, while the price in India, is about $1,000.
Not to suggest that every patent scofflaw country in the world, has a reasonable or altruistic argument.
Some folks just say: " We don't believe in the concept of intellectual property rights. So, we are never going to pay you a cent. But, our
corporations are going to use all of your cool ideas. Try to sue us if you like. In the meantime, fuck you very much."
Metacelsus - 25-6-2016 at 14:00
In my experience, procedures in patents from well-known pharma companies are reliable. For example, I recently adapted a procedure found in an AbbVie
patent for the deprotection of a terminal alkyne, and it worked reasonably well. I was removing a molecule of acetone from an alkyne formed from
2-methylbut-3-yn-2-ol. (The procedure wasn't the main focus of the patent; it was a minor step in the synthesis of their drug.) This was after a
procedure I found in the academic literature had failed (incomplete deprotection, tarry side products, yield 1.9%).