Laws of nature: Galileo would not be able to patent his findings from his experiments at the Leaning Tower of Pisa. Physical phenomena: Patent law classifies physical phenomena as products of nature. Thus, if your invention occurs in nature, it is a physical phenomenon and cannot be patented. Abstract ideas: Abstract ideas are concepts like pure mathematics and algorithms. You cannot patent a formula. However, you can patent an application of that formula. Thus, while you cannot patent a mathematical formula that produces nonrepeating patterns, you can patent paper products that use that formula to prevent rolls of paper from sticking together. Literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works: These can be Copyright protected. Inventions, which are considered not useful or possible: For example, the USPTO will not issue a patent on a perpetual motion machines; or offensive to public morality.
Joseph Schumpeter, known as the Prophet of Innovation, describes the importance of inventors in his Theory of Economic Development. Inventors are the "fiery-spirits" that disrupt the status quo with their vision of doing things 'better, faster, cheaper.' In the process, their inventions represent "the heroic intervention of individual men (or women) who appear as leaders toward new economic shores." We believe that intellectual assets, commonly taking the form of patented technology, are the least-understood and most-relevant resources to stimulate economic development through innovation. To make this happen, intellectual property (IP) needs to be more comprehensively understood so that better business decisions can be executed. This is why we are in business. An invention must have economic utility to benefit society. Some times, inventions are way before their time. However, most of the time, the business execution to commercialize the invention fails. In fact, those that conceptualize the invention rarely reap the rewards of the innovation's ultimate success.
A design patent covers the unique, ornamental, or visible shape or surface ornamentation of an article or object, even if only on a computer screen. Thus if a lamp, a building, a computer case, or a desk has a truly unique shape, its design can be design patented. Even computer screen icons and an arrangement of printing on a piece of paper can be patented. A design must be for an article that is different from an object in its natural state; thus a figure of a man would not be suitable for a design patent but if the man is in an unnatural position, this can be patented. The uniqueness of the shape must be purely ornamental or aesthetic and part of an article. If the design is functional, then only a utility patent is proper, even if it is also aesthetic. A good example is a jet plane with a constricted waist (narrow body) for reducing turbulence at supersonic speeds: Although the novel shape is attractive, its functionality makes it suitable for a utility patent only. A useful way to distinguish between a design and a utility invention is to ask, "Will removing or smoothing out the novel features substantially impair the function of the device?" If so, as in the jet plane with the narrowed body, this proves that the novel features have a significant functional purpose, so a utility patent in indicated. According to David Pressman's book "Patent it Yourself" two useful questions to ask to define design innovations are: (1) Is the novel feature(s) there for structural or functional reasons, or only for the purpose of ornamentation? (2) Does the novel feature make it look better or work better? (The utilitarian function always prevails.) If the state of the arts is such that the general nature of the feature and its function is old, but the feature has a novel shape that is an aesthetic improvement, then only a design patent will be proper. The design patent application must consist primarily of drawings, along with formal paperwork and a filing fee. Design patents last 14 years from the date of issuance.
For us to be successful, we need to understand your needs and deliver technologies that meet your needs. This is the essence of co-creation or synergy. We both benefit from having an ongoing relationship. With this in mind, we want to emphasize our commitment to you, our customer. You are the reason we are in business. Lewis' original idea came from working with people like you — people with a desire to better understand how the IP landscape influences business strategy and decision making. our commitment to you. For us to be successful, we need to understand your needs and deliver technologies that meet your needs. This is the essence of co-creation or synergy. We both benefit from having an ongoing relationship. With this in mind, we want to emphasize our commitment to you, our customer. You are the reason we are in business. Lewis' original idea came from working with people like you — people with a desire to better understand how the IP landscape influences business strategy and decision making. Here at IP Street, we believe you belong on a pedestal. Rather than develop technologies and impose them upon you, we are interested in providing a different model. Listening to you, understanding what you need based on our subject matter expertise, and then providing tools that meet those needs. So far, we have heard that you want a simplification of complex patent documents. You want more than search results, you want visual results that have concrete, real-world significance. You want efficient patent search tools, better resources to patent duration and determining patent value. You want business intelligence from IP that is meaningful and actionable. Are we right? For many of you, based on what you have been telling us about what our product can do, we believe we are. However, we are still listening. So if you have further suggestions and wishes, please do not hesitate to contact us.