kindafishy
New Member
Okay, so here is the scenario:
A new inventor has an idea for making a device that makes it very easy to connect a laptop to a car. You can already connect a laptop to a car, so the focus here is on the device as a new way to do it.
The inventor figures out the full set of technologies that he wants to use to create the device.
Before creating the prototype, the inventor does a US patent search and finds that within the last two years, someone has patented 'a device that allows a person to connect a laptop to a car'. There are obvious similarities, but this includes things like 'the laptop handles the input for the device' and 'the device passes input from the laptop to the car'. The hardware to handle the interaction is different and the software controlling everything is different, so one could argue that the underlying technologies used to create the devices are different, although both can be defined as 'a device that allows a person to connect a laptop to a car'.
To a consumer using one of these things, it would look and behave pretty much the same.
So, there are a couple questions that fall out of this:
1) Are the devices different because the technology is different, or are they the same because the concept is the same?
2) Assuming the devices are deemed to be different and a patent is granted to the inventor, would the holder of the original patent have any grounds to sue the inventor, especially in light of the fact that a reviewer, who was aware of the original patent granted the new patent?
Note that getting sued or otherwise blocked by the original patent holder is actually a very likely scenario since this patent holder's company doesn't actually build anything, but holds several patents and has a history of suing others who actually try to take a product to market.
A new inventor has an idea for making a device that makes it very easy to connect a laptop to a car. You can already connect a laptop to a car, so the focus here is on the device as a new way to do it.
The inventor figures out the full set of technologies that he wants to use to create the device.
Before creating the prototype, the inventor does a US patent search and finds that within the last two years, someone has patented 'a device that allows a person to connect a laptop to a car'. There are obvious similarities, but this includes things like 'the laptop handles the input for the device' and 'the device passes input from the laptop to the car'. The hardware to handle the interaction is different and the software controlling everything is different, so one could argue that the underlying technologies used to create the devices are different, although both can be defined as 'a device that allows a person to connect a laptop to a car'.
To a consumer using one of these things, it would look and behave pretty much the same.
So, there are a couple questions that fall out of this:
1) Are the devices different because the technology is different, or are they the same because the concept is the same?
2) Assuming the devices are deemed to be different and a patent is granted to the inventor, would the holder of the original patent have any grounds to sue the inventor, especially in light of the fact that a reviewer, who was aware of the original patent granted the new patent?
Note that getting sued or otherwise blocked by the original patent holder is actually a very likely scenario since this patent holder's company doesn't actually build anything, but holds several patents and has a history of suing others who actually try to take a product to market.
