Mistershine said:
Bitmap Frogs said:
nightsurge said:
^Some balance between the two, then, is needed.
I can see where my idea would be bad for those who cannot afford to make their own prototype right away, but at the same time there has to be some sort of better protection so people can't just patent every idea in the world just to sue others. Some way of deciding whether the patent is genuine? I can't really think of how they would do this......
The whole patent process is flawed because you can use a general patent and so long as your item is not "different" enough from an existing patent, you're screwed. |
Â
Yeah, shrug.
That's one hell of a pandora's box.
|
Proof of concept. If you can't afford to make it then you should at least be able to give proof that you have the technical ability/knowledge to be able make it. If the tech doesn't exist to implement your ideas then tough shit, you can't patent something you can't do. Sorry badgenome.
|
If we take this specific patent in question in the topic, the tech did exist and it was executable back then.
In general, however, you're pretty much correct.
