User:Charles R Talley/Homework Assignments/hw0128: Difference between revisions
Created page with "in progress" |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
in | ==Snowboard Binding (Patent # 4973073)== | ||
*References Cited: | |||
**Patent No. 4652007 | |||
**Patent No. 4741550 | |||
===Hotchkiss v. Greenwood=== | |||
This case has been brought before the United States Supreme Court to determine if the jury instructions delivered in district court were erroneous and cause for a new trial. The plaintiff's counsel requested the jury be instructed in a manner that connoted that the patent should be validated. Instead the jury was instructed with the insinuation that the plaintiff was not entitled to a patent or a verdict for that matter, since the patent in question lacked the true spirit of invention. In keeping with the spirit of invention, one cannot just create something by combining to other things to yield an insignificant advance in science/technology. In the words of Mr. Justice Nelson, "the improvement consists in the superiority of the material, and which is not new"; "but this of itself can never be the subject of a patent." "The difference is formal, and destitute of ingenuity or invention." | |||
In light of the decision and opinion delivered here, one can call into question the patentability of countless patents that are simply improvements of a previous design. In the case of my selected patent, Patent No. 4973073, the patent holder was making an improvement upon the snowboard binding systems detailed in patents no. 4652007 and 4741550. Unlike the knob in Hotchkiss v. Greenwood, however, this patent makes significant improvements over its precedent. It is not simply substituting a new material or implementing an insignificant change. This patent revolutionized snowboard bindings and the manner in which they bind the boot to the board; and it is still a system commonly used today. All previous binding designs required the fastening of straps or clamps to secure the boot, but this patent introduces a design that uses the force of the rider's step and weight to secure the boot automatically. This is far more inventive than a mere combination of preexisting ideas or designs. | |||
===Lyon v. Bausch & Lomb Optical=== | |||
Revision as of 16:17, 28 January 2011
Snowboard Binding (Patent # 4973073)
- References Cited:
- Patent No. 4652007
- Patent No. 4741550
Hotchkiss v. Greenwood
This case has been brought before the United States Supreme Court to determine if the jury instructions delivered in district court were erroneous and cause for a new trial. The plaintiff's counsel requested the jury be instructed in a manner that connoted that the patent should be validated. Instead the jury was instructed with the insinuation that the plaintiff was not entitled to a patent or a verdict for that matter, since the patent in question lacked the true spirit of invention. In keeping with the spirit of invention, one cannot just create something by combining to other things to yield an insignificant advance in science/technology. In the words of Mr. Justice Nelson, "the improvement consists in the superiority of the material, and which is not new"; "but this of itself can never be the subject of a patent." "The difference is formal, and destitute of ingenuity or invention."
In light of the decision and opinion delivered here, one can call into question the patentability of countless patents that are simply improvements of a previous design. In the case of my selected patent, Patent No. 4973073, the patent holder was making an improvement upon the snowboard binding systems detailed in patents no. 4652007 and 4741550. Unlike the knob in Hotchkiss v. Greenwood, however, this patent makes significant improvements over its precedent. It is not simply substituting a new material or implementing an insignificant change. This patent revolutionized snowboard bindings and the manner in which they bind the boot to the board; and it is still a system commonly used today. All previous binding designs required the fastening of straps or clamps to secure the boot, but this patent introduces a design that uses the force of the rider's step and weight to secure the boot automatically. This is far more inventive than a mere combination of preexisting ideas or designs.
