Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

1.  

   No Subject Given

   

   Anonymous Coward, Dec 8th, 2005 @ 6:04am

   
   

   I read the patent and aside from all the legalese garb, I am still at a loss. What did they invent? Nothing, to me it simply sounds like they are just adding information to a database to include regional businesses. Of course their logic is flawed, because their resoning assumes that all busineses would want to be listed on the net. I am sure that some of the mobile plumbers could care less about this. We all know that word of mouth sells better than anything else.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

2.  

   Re: No Subject Given

   

   Anonymous Coward, Dec 8th, 2005 @ 6:06am

   
   

   Sorry I posted this to the wrong patent thread. Maybe I could patent an invention that would prevent my own stupidity. Then when a company actually creates something that does that, I could sue them and become rich. Muhaha

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

3.  

   Google Patent

   

   Michael Birnholz, Dec 8th, 2005 @ 6:48am

   
   

   Here is a novel idea. How about Google sending one of their search appliances to the USPTO, then it would actually WORK (the USPTO search).

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

4.  

   If only it were so easy

   

   Nadine, Dec 8th, 2005 @ 6:51pm

   
   

   You have to consider the database format, how stuff is input into the database. How to get stuff that is currently in the database into a new format (if it is necessary to provide more functionality). Installing it sitewide and training examiners to use it. That is not even considering what research they need to do to properly plan the system and come up with one that will be consistent with the whole Trilateral Office thing.
   It's not impossible, but it will take investment of a lot of time and money. Considering the backlog in some of the art units now (18-30 months before the first O.A.) well...
   (Besides if the gov is making money from the current system, why would they care to change it?)

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

5.  

   USPTO doesn't care.

   

   mhh5, Dec 12th, 2005 @ 9:41am

   
   

   I ran into this problem yrs ago, and I emailed with a USPTO employee who seemed rather uninterested in improving the accessibility of their systems. They just don't care. So it's up to private services to fill in the gap, and I'm sure the USPTO will make some money off of licensing access to their database.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

6.  

   Re: USPTO doesn't care.

   

   Michael Birnholz, Dec 13th, 2005 @ 6:37pm

   
   

   Ahhh, a new business idea? I think that IP attorneys and inventors would gladly pay for a 'google' version of the USPTO database. I also noticed, that my comments here get indexed quite well at google, so now that I created this business model, perhaps Google will give me a finders fee of some sort :)

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment