Your first time here? Welcome, I'm glad you've dropped in.... David Soul (aka Bricoleur)

U.S. Patent 6,368,227, issued April 9,2002
describes a method for swinging “in which a user positioned on a
standard swing suspended by two chains from a substantially horizontal
tree branch induces side-to-side motion by pulling alternately on one
chain and then the other.”


Apparently filed by a Patent Lawyer to show his son how he makes his living !

Apologists for the Patent Office, and the ridiculous policies that have
spawned some of the ridiculous approvals of software and business
process patents, have maintained that errors that examiners have made
are due to 1) overwork or 2) lack of examiners trained in software in
particular.

Right.  And they don’t have anyone in the patent office that has
used a swing?  If the father has never seen it done in a sideways
mottion before his 5 year old did it, he toohas  led a very sheltered a life.

The USPTO is out of control.  Although this might seem funny, it
is not.  The chuckles and guffaws only seek to distract from the
seriousness of the clamp down on innovation that will follow if the
aims of the Consitution are ignored and current practice at the
office continues with the support of Congress.

Even if they‘ve
never seen a swing used this way surely somebody in the office
has  a basic understanding of motion
and would state that the outcome is obvious and the application
trivial…
but apparently this was of no matter to the examiner.  Just as
prior art seem of no concern given the wave of software patents being
granted. OUT OF CONTROL.

Just about a month after this story in the Mercury News (April 17,
2002) someone in the Patent Office finally woke up and this resulted in this
subsequent announcement about the Patent: Commissioner Ordered Reexaminations – OG Date: 02 July 2002 .90/006,289, Ordered Date: May 21, 2002, Cl. 472/118, Title: METHOD OF SWINGING ON A SWING, Inventor: Steven Olson, Owner of Record: Steven Olson, St. Paul, MN, Attorney or Agent: Peter L. Olson, St. Paul, MN, Ex. Gp.: 3712
The article:
goto
Originally Posted to cep.weblogger.com by David Soul on 2/14/04; 12:21:44 AM
in the IP section.

permalink#

Related posts on Bricoleur Systems -auto generated:

  1. Patents 2.0 IEEE Spectrum: Patents 2.0 Writing in Spectrum online,  Lee Hollaar sugests “…. scrapping software patents altogether is not the solution....
  2. The Coming Software Patent Crisis: Can Linux Survive Bogus software patents pose a genuine threat to computer industry innovation. In this column, University of Virginia professor and author...
  3. Wrinkle in 'Seamless' Feel of the Web U.S. Patent No. 5,838,906 was assigned by the University of California to Chicago based Eolas Technology in return for a...
  4. Petition Against Software Patent To:  The United States Government We, the undersigned, are voters involved in the IT industry who believe that software patents...
  5. Petition Against Software Patent To:  The United States Government We, the undersigned, are voters involved in the IT industry who believe that software patents...

Tags: CEP, intellectual property

This entry was posted on Friday, January 13th, 2006 at 3:24 am and is filed under Odds & Sods. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Comments are closed at this time.