RSS
Can You Patent How You Spin An Advertising Sign On A Street Corner?
from the yikes dept
Even with the Supreme Court helping to put some common sense back into the patent system, there are still plenty of people who clearly want to stretch the purpose of the patent system for beyond its constitutional purpose. The latest is highlighted by Justin Levine at Against Monopoly. He points to a fascinating and amusing LA Times article about the rough-and-tumble, cut-throat world of street corner sign spinning. You've probably seen the folks, standing on street corners with big cardboard signs, advertising homes for sale or a new tanning salon or whatever. Apparently, it's a big business and a very competitive one. However, the point Justin highlights shows to the extreme it's reached:
Aarrow keeps dozens of moves in a "trick-tionary," which only a handful of people have seen, said co-founder Mike Kenny. The company records spinners' movements and sends them in batches to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. "We have to take our intellectual property pretty seriously," he said.Read that again. The company is trying to protect the way street corner advertisers spin their signs. Thomas Jefferson is rolling over in his grave.
I have an app...
Developer Census: Be Counted. It takes less than two minutes.
How My First Game Made $28,623
I have an idea...
75 Questions To Help You Write An RFP For Website Design
5 Things You Should Know About Crowdfunding For Startups
I’m looking for policy...
Jon Potter: Software Patent Trolls Can Be Stopped By U.S. Patent Office And Congress
Developers On Patents: Ron Garret of Awun
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
And when did serious become synonymous for absurd?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
A whole new kind of stupid
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Floodgates
I like the idiotic patents being Sign-Spinner Patents. I may adopt that as well AP. =)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: A whole new kind of stupid
weird how that happens
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
It'll never work
/not really.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
wha wha what?
1. Lawyers get paid to make laws
2. Lawyers get paid to enforce those laws
3. Lawyers get paid to find loop-holes in the laws lawyers got paid to create..
It makes perfect sense.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Spinning out of control
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Reflects more on reporting than patenting...
Just how did this morph into "opening the floodgates for ridiculous patents" requiring the government to shut anything down?
I see five interpretations of this rather vague description in a newspaper article:
1. The article said they send something in batches to the US patent AND TRADEMARK office. As the name implies, that office handles applications for both patents and trademark registrations. Perhaps the company hopes to claim trademark rights in particular methods of spinning signs. They're saying, in essence, "if you see someone spin a sign in this particular way, that means this advertising comes from Aarow". If the pattern of spinning does, in fact, serve a source-indicating function (that is, only Aarow's employees use a particular way of waving a sign) this would be proper, and no different than registering a rotating pattern of lights in the sky as a trademark (Ballantyne's searchlights, reg. 2323892), or "THE AUDIO AND VISUAL REPRESENTATION OF A COIN SPINNING ON A HARD SURFACE," (Northwestern Bank, reg. 641872), a particular sound (the Tarzan yell for action figures, reg. 2210506), or anything else which serves to distinguish your goods/services from someone else's.
2. They really are filing patent applications to protect specific sets of sign movements as methods of advertising. I'd tend to agree that such a patent would be sort of useless, but methods are patentable. The claim could be something like "A method of advertising by a person on a street corner comprising the step of doing a backbend on one hand while spinning a sign above the person's head." At a minimum cost of $1,500 in filing and issue fees alone, per patent, that would seem to be a very expensive way of "protecting" a very narrow method. If they're really trying to patent a batch at a time, that could get very expensive very quickly. If they are doing this, none of the applications has yet been published and no patents have issued, at least not assigned to Aarow.
3. The company is completely clueless, and thinks that sending batches of descriptions of moves to the USPTO somehow protects their Intellectual Property. Never discount ignorance or stupidity as an explanation.
4. The company (or the reporter) has confused the USPTO with the Copyright Office, and are sending their "Trick-tionary" with its writeups in for registration of copyright, in the belief that this somehow protects the moves themselves. Interestingly, this might actually work - choreography is one of the things which can be protected by copyright, and you can register a claim to the copyright in a dance or pantomime, so long as it's "fixed in a tangible medium of expression". Suing for violation of copyright in one of the moves "fixed" in the "Trick-tionary" could be a fascinating copyright suit indeed...
or
5. The reporter is completely clueless and has absolutely no idea what intellectual property, the USPTO, or anything else is.
I vote for number 5, personally.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Reflects more on reporting than patenting...
(also to include Mike Masnick as one of the most clueless dudes...)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Now Seinfeld will really go after that guy...
http://www.tbs.com/video/0,,47725|314580|,00.html
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Number 4
Bikram Yoga was recently copyrighted, for example. Even though all the movements are in the public domain, a particular sequence of unprotected public domain "facts" can be copyrighted as an original "selection and arrangement." If the sign-spinners have a particular order of moves, I think it could be done!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
The second issue is that if an employee of Aarrow comes up with his own routine, and aarrow "IP's" it, then the employee can never perform that same "trick" if he goes to work for another sign company, since the creation of an employee as part of his job belongs to an employeer. Maybe these spinners will form a union and add their own protections to future sign spinning employment contracts?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Spinning
I am sending am immediate cease and desist to Thomas Jefferson.
We at B166er, take our intellectual property pretty seriously, and I don't remember releasing "method and/or machine for spinning in grave" under any license.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
related copyright contention
According to local pundit Pat Lynch: Associated Press reports a law professor at the
University of Arkansas at Fayetteville believes
forwarding emails violates long-standing laws
protecting letter writers back to the days of quill
pens. Assistant Professor Ned Snow argues in an
article to be published in the Kansas Law Review that
common law protects text message and e-mail writers
from having their words forwarded or published on Web
sites for public view.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Spinning
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
I know where this is headed...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Industrious people
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
That's nothing...
Needless to say, she will rule the ENTIRE gentlemen's entertainment industry!
...licensing will be cash only.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
About the time that patents stopped "promoting innovation."
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: That's nothing...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Wrong court ...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Number 4
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Spinning out of control
Jerry claims to have invented the twirl used to sell umbrellas. Another individual claims to have invented.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: That's nothing...
Fixed that for ya.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: wha wha what?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Reflects more on reporting than patenting...
6. The company is filing the paperwork anyway to see what actually comes of it. If in their favor, then they will go around suing everyone who uses their moves. If not in their favor, well at least they got some media exposure.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
patents
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
intellectual property
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
spinning
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Waah waah waah
Jeez bruno, get a life. Some things are more important than being the one to say "I came up with that". I sure don't remember streetcorner breakdancers suing each other over their "unique" moves. By your logic, doesn't the very first homeless person who came up with the ubiquitous "will work for food" sign deserve some kind of credit?
Your problem relates to being greedy and selfish, not artsy or innovative. Have a great day. :)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
aarrowads.com and stop being so closed minded if you invented something and alot of people kept going to the same places you were trying to sell your product to but they tried to sell it at a cheaper quality and price
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
It's not practical.... It will never work
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Sign Spinning is a New Sport!
We're not trying to sue ANYONE. We're simply saying this, "Look, We (AArrow) have taken this (form of outdoor advertising) to a whole new level. A level that cannot be compared. We are the elite of the elite when it comes to "Sign Spinning". like the bilderberg group (if you dont know who they are, then keep drinking your flouride water.)
Its like this:
In martial arts you have various movements and techniques that clarify a specific type of martial art. for example, if you watch any fight or mma videos and you yourself know certain types of martial arts, then you yourself can say, "hey he just did a jump hook kick." but, To the untrained eye, noone knows wtf that is. however, you do because you have the experience to know exactly what it is. maybe you took tae kwon do and thats why you know... Well sign spinning is exactly like a martial art in the sense that if you dont do it or study it, then you wont know wtf is going on.
AArrow just wants to copyright its specific style of sign spinning.
for this reason you wont see knockoff companies doing our stylistic moves. they'll have to make up their own stuff. you catch me?
you dont see kung fu experts copyrighting a kick, no. but what you so see is a clear definition of that kicks origin. the style, the technique, and the person/s responsible for it.
We (AArrow) know that people are going to try to copy us, we dont mind, we're just clarifying Our own style of Sign Spinning,
We are simply trying to protect what we do.
Its like Velcro man, it was actually micro loop/hook technology that makes it what it is. Who cares, because when you buy Velcro your paying for a marketed brand that secured and controlled what it created. Velcro isnt saying u cant make micro loop/hook technology, but what they are saying is that you damn sure better not call it Velcro.
thats America for you, From Freedom to Fascism.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Sign Spinners
Exactly what is the name of the style you are trying to protect and who on Earth cares about the name anyway?
I bet you one trade marked spin that the only reason for declaring property rights is for the followup publicity. ;-)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Probable reasoning
It's the next big thing and everyone wants to copy it. It only makes sense to protect what you created. Selfish and Greedy? Isn't that the point of business and marketing? It's called competition, and patenting what you started gives you a huge advantage. Why wouldn't you want to do something like that?
As for the opening the flood gates. That's taking it to an extreme. Just like saying well if gays can get married soon people and animals can get married. It's just absurd.
Now patenting tricks might seem odd, it's purpose isn't to sue everyone who does the trick. If someone directly stole *with given proof* the "group of tricks" then action can be taken. Also if an ex-spinner used his knowledge to create a company or just became and independent spinner, he'd have to wait a certain amount of years before doing so. This isn't some random bull shit thinking. These steps have been thought out carefully. Unlike most of these comments. This has been reviewed by lawyers, patent makers, and other intelligent individuals. So before you speak your view, do you really think your logic out does theirs?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Makes No Sense
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment