The S3TC Patent Might Be Invalid

[RealNC]

Good thread. If someone tries to patent some new 3D display method, we can point to this thread for prior art. lol :P

[V!NCENT]

Still I like seeing many films in 3d and hope that a pill is promptly invented that allows non wobbly eyed people to fully enjoy 3d films/games/screens without sickness. Surely modern medical tech can ensure the 3ds's success?

ROFLOL

Good thread. If someone tries to patent some new 3D display method, we can point to this thread for prior art. lol :P

We're shit outta luck; yesterday mister Obama signed a 'first to file' instead of a 'first to invent' act, that we'll probably see about a year from now, entering the entire western world

It's good that floating point got 'prior arted', because prior art is no more...

[smitty3268]

Good thread. If someone tries to patent some new 3D display method, we can point to this thread for prior art. lol :P

The new patent law invalidates prior art, doesn't it? Switches the US system to first-to-file rather than first-to-invent.

Edit: oops, looks like V!NCENT had the same thought first.

[RealNC]

God bless America.

[F.Ultra]

We're shit outta luck; yesterday mister Obama signed a 'first to file' instead of a 'first to invent' act, that we'll probably see about a year from now, entering the entire western world

The new patent law invalidates prior art, doesn't it? Switches the US system to first-to-file rather than first-to-invent.

Actually no! What the new law does is to bring USA into how patents work in the rest of the world so for once this is actually the USA learning from other countries!

First to file does not invalidate prior art, it simply means that he who files the patent first gets the patent (if more than one part files for the same patent). If there is published prior art then the patent gets invalidated, just like today. The key difference is that with the old system of first to invent, companies could obscure the details of the patents since they only had to present proof that they invented the thing before the other party filed for a patent. I.e this was the way that sub-marine patents could be launched, with the new system sub-marine patents can no longer exist since only prior art (which must be published) can invalidate a patent.

So this is actually a good thing!

Found a good quote from a slashdotter about this:

I'm sure someone's going to start asking whether a First-To-File system affects the prior art doctrine and whether it means big companies can steal ideas from open source projects and patenting them. Let's dispense with some misconceptions.

Misconception 1: This destroys the prior art system.
* This isn't true. A prior art will still cause an application to be denied under 35 USC 102. This means that if any sort of prior art is published (i.e. available to the public) that would anticipate or render an application invalid, it would still operate to render the application unpatentable. Remember, the law requires all patents to be "novel" and "nonobvious".

Misconception 2: This would mean big companies can steal ideas from open source projects and file applications on them.
* This isn't true either. The open source project would function as prior art against the later application. Even though there is a first to file system, it doesn't mean that the first person to file can steal ideas that were out there and use it as their own.

The first to file system only really works in a very specific context - where you have two inventors who filed an application on almost identical types of inventions within a short period of time. Under the current system, there has to be a very fact-intensive and time consuming process of determining who was the first inventor - which means going through years of lab notebooks and correspondences to pin out the priority between two applicants. This is very expensive, very time consuming, and it's also taxing on the court system and the USPTO. A First to File system makes it much easier - priority can be determined within seconds of looking at the filing date.

[Nevertime]

Actually no! What the new law does is to bring USA into how patents work in the rest of the world so for once this is actually the USA learning from other countries!
:

Glad to see someone knows what there talking about. Always a good idea to use the internet that your sat at and find the facts from credible sources (not phoronix forum posts...... or phoronix articles :s ) before claiming the unbelievable. Takes 1 min on google. Its easy to have an opinion but an informed one is far more impressive.

[V!NCENT]

Actually no! What the new law does is to bring USA into how patents work in the rest of the world so for once this is actually the USA learning from other countries!

Oh thank God!

Seriously, my bad ofcourse, but could the US government please freaking stop making names for acts that are the complete opposite of what they are called? -_-

[yogi_berra]

Always a good idea to use the internet that your sat at and find the facts from credible sources (not phoronix forum posts...... or phoronix articles :s ) before claiming the unbelievable. Takes 1 min on google. Its easy to have an opinion but an informed one is far more impressive.

Because the internet is always right and video never lies...

[yogi_berra]

Oh thank God!

Seriously, my bad ofcourse, but could the US government please freaking stop making names for acts that are the complete opposite of what they are called? -_-

But what would the tin-foil hat crowd do with their free time if that happened?

[Nevertime]

Because the internet is always right and video never lies...

Many people are able to source reliable information from the net as I stated phoronix forums aren't a reliable source. Some degree of initiative in necessary.

It makes me feel patronising having to spell this out to you but you had to make that flippant comment. The idea that you can't source reliable info from the web is a product of the same simplistic thinking as the idea that Wikipedia is rubbish compared to printed encyclopaedias. You have to have basic awareness of when it comes to sourcing any information from any source and we can all mess up, but we can all take measures to cross reference and seek more reliable sites (Not phoronix). I do this and I imagine most active internet users do this without even thinking. Certainly if a claim is a big one like the patent systems getting fundamentally destroyed it would be best either check it or ignore it till you hear the same thing from a more credible source. If anything now we have the web many people are more aware of the factual inaccuracies that was always there in all media.