[TowerTalk] Patentability (OT)

[Tom Rauch]

Right on target Paul. Especially on the cost issue.

I've helped several times with patents, and the total cost was only a 
few thousand dollars in every case.   
 
> The validity of any patent stands or falls on its claims, not the
> specifications.  In addition to the prior art, other factors that affect a
> patent's validity are: 1) obviousness, 2) novelty, and 3) utility.   The
> test for obviousness rests on whether one who is skilled in the prior art
> would consider the idea as obvious.  And the idea is not treated alone: If
> one who is skilled in the prior art can conceive the idea by COMBINING
> prior art references, then the idea is obvious and fails validity.  It's
> also important to note that just because one obtains a patent, does not
> necessarily mean that the patent is valid.  It can fail for lack of any of
> the above elements.
> 
> To real us back on topic, take a look at the claims within the N4XM
> transmatch patent.  I believe that if anyone really wanted to attack the
> validity of his claims, there would be little difficulty in winning.
> 
> -Paul, W9AC

That's right. I'm sure the same is true for the driven element patent.

The problem is cost. In the small limited-profit Amateur radio 
market no one could afford to incur needless expenses in a "peeing 
contest" over what is really a useless patent.

In effect, when the market is this small and has such a low margin, 
the patent is traditionally used either to stifle fair competition, on 
occasion as an ego-booster,  or to add a bit of "fluff" to the 
marketing.




73, Tom W8JI
w8ji@contesting.com

--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
Submissions:              towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-towertalk@contesting.com