Man Tries To Patent Godly Powers; Justifies It By Pointing To Software & Business Method Patents

from the skilled-in-the-art dept

RichS was the first of a few of you to send in this bizarre story of a guy who tried to patent "Godly Powers." From the abstract:
Christopher Anthony Roller is a godly entity. “Granters” had been given my powers (acquired my powers) (via God probably). These “granters” have been receiving financial gain from godly powers. These “granters” may be using their powers without morals. Chris Roller wants exclusive right to the ethical use and financial gain in the use of godly powers on planet Earth. The design of godly-products have no constraints, just like any other invention, but the ethnic consideration of it’s use will likely be based on a majority vote of a group, similar to law creation. The commission I require could range from 0-100% of product price, depending on the product’s value and use.
While crazy, his argument actually relies on the same basic reasoning for why the USPTO has been approving software and business method patents:
"like software, godly powers is a method, and affects a machine. Like business methods, godly powers produces a useful, concrete, and tangible result, and that should be all that's needed for statutory material."
So perhaps the guy is trying to show the ridiculousness of software and business method patents. Or perhaps he's just crazy. Maybe both.

Patent examiner Tod Van Roy issued a "non-final rejection" on this patent, by noting "The specification has not described how one of ordinary skill in the art could make or use the claimed godly powers." Indeed. Eventually, there was a final rejection on the patent, though Roller apparently sent a "Miscellaneous Incoming Letter" at a later date as well, but the patent application is now considered abandoned. As for Roller and his godly powers, we hope he's using them for good.

Filed Under: business method patents, godly powers, patents, sofware patents


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. icon
    PrometheeFeu (profile), 14 Jun 2011 @ 9:50am

    I think the most telling thing is that they issued a "non-final rejection" first. Non-final? Seriously? Did they expect him to amend the claims to only include godly powers from the Hebrew god as claiming all godly powers would be overly broad?

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.