25
Yes, you can submit a YouTube Video as prior art as long as the YouTube video is publicly available. YouTube videos usually have the publication date under the video, such as "Uploaded by X on Oct 17, 2011". If you provide a hard copy of the video itself, it be hard to prove that the video was public or its publication date, especially if the public version ...
20
As others have pointed out, a youtube video could be prior art, in the sense that a video recording is eligible subject matter.
Prosecution is sometimes ex parte, as in the case of a non-published patent application. This means that the office actions (rejections etc) from the USPTO to the applicant are sent only to the applicant, and not made public. So, ...
15
From the USPTO web site:
To the Full-Text of a Particular Patent: A special shortened URL format:
http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?patentnumber=5123456
where the patent number "5123456" may be replaced by any valid patent number within the database, has been established to enable users to more easily construct a URL for bookmarking or ...
14
I am not aware of a definitive answer to your question either in the statutes or in case law, but I can set out likely parameters for making such a determination. The following excerpt from 35 USC section 102 most directly addresses the issues relevant to your question:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless—
(a) the invention was known or used by ...
11
According to the USPTO FAQ:
Most patent applications filed on or after November 29, 2000, will be
published 18 months after the filing date of the application, or any
earlier filing date relied upon under Title 35, United States Code.
Otherwise, all patent applications are maintained in the strictest
confidence until the patent is issued or the ...
9
Yes, it's called a statutory disclaimer:
A patentee owning the whole or any sectional interest in a patent may disclaim any complete claim or claims in a patent. In like manner any patentee may disclaim or dedicate to the public the entire term, or any terminal part of the term, of the patent granted.
9
Well, all evidences might be taken into consideration.
To be a prior art, evidence must be public and need to have a date and comprise one or more subject matter, which is claimed in new invention. But, like other evidences in the internet, video can be deleted from youtube and there will be a problem to prove that 1 year ago youtube (or any other public ...
9
Under the law, prior art must fit within one of the categories defined in 35 U.S.C. 102. The most likely categories for a youtube video are (1) a "printed publication" or (2) evidence of the invention being "known ... by others in this country."
There is at least one case holding that a video is NOT a printed publication. Diomed, Inc. v. AngioDynamics, Inc....
7
In general, patents/applications are heavily favored as you noticed. One contributing factor is that the search system (EAST) is the subject of a good amount of examiner training and is actually pretty good since it has a lot of operators that let you really search down to the sentence level. Another factor is that patents somewhat have their own lexicon ...
6
I have seen a YouTube video cited as prior art in an Office action, and a claim rejection was based in part on the YouTube video. So yes, YouTube videos can be prior art. In the Office action, the Examiner provided a screenshot of the video as well as its URL.
6
Maybe http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/ could help you with that ?
From their website:
Open Invention Network® is refining the intellectual property model so that important patents are openly shared in a collaborative environment. Patents owned by Open Invention Network® are available royalty-free to any company, institution or individual that agrees ...
6
Making the accusation of willfulness is trivial; proving it at a trial is more difficult. Simple failure to search is not sufficient basis for a finding of willfulness. Some showing of actual knowledge of infringement or likely infringement is required. Notification (whether by the patent holder or any other party) is evidence of knowledge.
As with so ...
5
First, the search tools that we examiners have are tuned for searching natural language, not source code, so it's far easier to find natural-language prior art than source code prior art.
And your question assumes that most patent examiners who handle software-related applications are proficient at reading source code. Most of us are not. And there are ...
5
If you don't have a viable alternative and you are wiling put in the work, why not. I would recommend the well known book: Patent it yourself, by David Pressman and the less well known book by Ronald Slusky: Invention Analysis and Claiming. Although provisional applications do not need claims, seeing the thinking behind claims should help you with ...
5
You can also try USPTO Bulk Data. Enter your patent number in corresponding refine field. After filtering patents press Request download (XML).
4
The patent examiners are required to adhere to strict ethics codes (PDF warning) put forth by the Department of Commerce.
As a part of this examiner's of a particular grade must supply the following (page 12 of the PDF):
If you are designated as required to file such a report, please keep in mind that the
information you disclose is used to provide ...
4
Paul Morgan has a good article posted here on this subject:
http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2012/01/guest-post-should-you-submit-third-party-prior-art.html
If the prior art is used to reject a patent application, it will appear in the prosecution history. If an Office Action contains a rejection relying on that prior art, that prior art will be listed as ...
4
A pending patent application does not provide the owner with any enforceable exclusionary rights to stop others from making, using, offering for sale, selling or importing the claimed invention. So, you cannot be sued for infringement until a patent issues, if ever.
When a patent application is laid open (published) in Canada, the prosecution history (the ...
4
Regarding "if the Canadian guy's patent is rejected, can I try", I assume you mean "can I try to patent it".
The answer is no, insofar as what you want to patent is contained in (or obvious in light of) his patent application. You can only get a patent for something that is new, not something that is already in public knowledge (e.g. published for all to ...
4
The USPTO tries to follow the law and the rules. To show a person skilled in the art how to make and use an invention doesn't mean you need to give them production blueprints - especially in the "predictable arts". Also, the implementation the inventor describes doesn't need to work particularly well. One way to think about it might be "is there more ...
4
Google is the clearing house for USPTO XML, via their Bulk Downloads site. The Grant Full Text is probably what you're looking for. The only company (that I am aware of) that currently offers full text XML on a per-patent basis via an API is Fairview Research (paid service with non-redistribution of XML source), and they are also the source of the Public ...
4
Originally, there was a requirement that the inventor teach the best mode (that the inventor knows about) in the specification. In recent years, that requirement has been a bit relaxed, but it still is in effect.
Personally, I don't like obfuscation. If the patent obfuscates too much, it can potentially be rejected or invalidated as not being enabling ...
4
Not an answer. Just comment too long to fit the comment section.
Such feature won't be seen as essential or even necessary. When studying patents, I sometimes feel that "Geeze, I need a 3D model to understand this". However, with some efforts, I can understand most mechanical patents.
It could easily become a trap for new or sloppy inventors. In preparing ...
4
It is likely you are seeing the effects of a continuation (or divisional, outside of the US). The continuation retains the priority date of its parent, but has a much later filing date.
By way of example:
A Canadian application (CA1) is filed on 1 Jun 2012. CA1 therefore has a filing date of 1 Jun 2012, but no priority date.
A US application (US1) claiming ...
4
We are confused where to register the patent? US or Europe?
Patents are territorial. If you want to prevent competitors from using your invention in the US, then you'll need a US patent. If you want to prevent competitors from using your invention in Europe, then you'll need a European patent. Similarly for any other country you're interested in.
The ...
3
Creating a URL to the USPTO's published applications is ugly.
But, if you have a number of publications, one work-around is to create the links in the format required by the USPTO by using Excel functions and macros. A list of publication numbers can be placed in a first column, while portions of the constant 'boilerplate' text is placed in a second column,...
3
Yes, it can. I did a quick search and found over 100 patents with a youtube.com prior art citation. The earliest citations I found are in US 7783710, US 7844507, and US 7934725.
3
Seeing that your profile says you're in Palo Alto and affiliated with Stanford, I think you could probably find a good patent attorney just by driving up and down Page Mill Road, or asking some of your colleagues. But perhaps you were looking for something more?
One approach is to look at successfully asserted or widely-licensed patents in your field and ...
3
My best advice is to ask other inventors you know. Also, the top person in town is very unlikely to edit and finalize patent applications written by the inventor. It's like the mechanic's sign: $50/hour, $60 if you watch, $80 if you help.
3
It's only stupid if you plan to build a proper business plan around this idea and commercialize it. In that case, your provisional patent may not 'have teeth', and you wasted time and money.
Software patents are exceptionally tricky. You claims could hold no real weight, if challenged.... which is the only time that really matters. Remember that a ...
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible
