"Mike Williams" <mik### [at] nospamplease> wrote in message
news:My4### [at] econymdemoncouk...
> Wasn't it Peter J. Holzer who wrote:

> >>"Mark Wagner" <mar### [at] gtenet> wrote in message
> >>news:394313ef@news.povray.org...
> >>>
> >>> Mark Gordon wrote in message <39421BB5.AB8BA839@mailbag.com>...
> >>> >1984 - LZW compression invented and written up in IEEE Computer
> >>> >1985 - LZW patent approved
> >>
> >>What I do not understand:
> >>
> >>When LZW was published 1984,
> >>how can it be patented in 1985?
> >>
> >>I mean as soon as I publish an idea in a newspaper,
> >>it's not any more possible to patent it,
> >>because the idea is general knowledge because
> >>was published before
> >
> >That's not quite correct. The "prior art" rule prevents people from
> >patenting things which they did not invent themselves (otherwise
> >somebody might patent the wheel and then sue all the car manufacturers).
> >If you invent something, you can certainly show it or describe it to any
> >number of people and still patent it. However, it might be somewhat
> >difficult to prove that you are the inventor, if you show it to too many
> >people. As other people already pointed out, it takes some time to
> >approve a patent (if fact, 1 year seems to be remarkably short!).
>
> I don't think that "prior art" is the rule in question here. If you
> publish details of your invention and then later apply for a patent,

If You publish something in a newspaper,
it's not possible to have a patent later.
Because publishing it makes it general knowledge.

There was once the application for a patent to raise
sunken ships by blowing styrofoam balls into it.

The application was turned down, because it was
public knowledge to do so.
In the 50ties, it was published in a Mickey Mouse
that Donald Duck has raised a sunken ship by
blowing tennis balls into it.


--

Clear targets for a confused civilization
http://www.BeingFound.com
web design and seminars
+43 699 17343674

Post a reply to this message