This cartoon is hopefully funny enough to make you chuckle.  I could use a ergonomic office chair that reclines, is heated and gives a vibrating massage, but I am not sure I want to get involved with one that also comes equipped to provide electro-shock therapy.  Not that I would shock myself, but you never can trust co-workers, can you?

 Amusement device
US Patent No. 6,497,623
Issued December 24, 2002

Those of you who are familiar with patent law may think you recognize this invention.  Virtually everyone who is a wacky patent fan has probably seen the Human slingshot machine, which is US Patent No. 5,421,783, which issued on June 6, 1995.  This invention is certainly similar, but this is an improved human slingshot machine.  It would seem that previous attempts at such slingshot machines have deficiencies.  Imagine that!

According to U2 manager Paul McGuinness, Internet service providers are to blame for continuing music piracy.  Speaking at conference in France, McGuinness said that ISPs should be disconnecting those who download tracks illegally, stating that ISPs have “been at our trough for too long.” He also claimed that ISPs are to blame for the “shoddy, careless and downright dishonest way” in which artists have been treated in the era of digital music.

Excuse me for noticing, but U2 seems to be doing just fine, so how McGuinness thinks that artists are being treated poorly in the era of digital music is simply ridiculous.  In fact, I would say that the statement that artists are being treated poorly because of Internet Service Providers is hysterically funny if it were not so tragically sad.  Either McGuinness just isn’t paying attention to reality, he is recklessly ignorant or he is just plain arrogant. 

If you ask the owners of most companies whether they have any intellectual property assets, assuming they know what you are talking about they are likely to say no.  The problem with that, however, is that the answer should universally be a resounding YES!  Every company has intellectual property assets.  The name of your company is an asset that can be protected via various trademark laws, and can generate good will, which is potentially the largest asset of any kind that many businesses will have.  Explained in this way many will at least acknowledge that intellectual property assets exist, but the one type of intellectual property that most businesses completely ignore is the trade secret. 

Flush toilet for a dog
US Patent No. 6,769,382 [ PDF ]
Issued August 3, 2004 

The patent on this toilet for dogs reads almost like a Monty Python sketch really.  The Background of the Invention starts by explaining that domestic pets such as dogs provide love and companionship to human beings, but they also create the daunting task associated with, shall we say, “maintenance.”  The inventor laments the failed attempts of others to provide an indoor toilet facility for dogs.  Can you see the inventor setting up a non-obvious argument here?  If others have failed then the invention cannot be obvious, right?  I don’t think we need to worry about obviousness for this one though, but I digress.

Upright Type Cleaner
U.S. Patent No. 7,313,845 [ PDF ]
Patent Issued: January 1, 2008

It is almost unbeliveable to imagine, but on New Years Day 2008, while many of us were recovering from the previous night or watching lopsided college football bowl games, the United States Patent Office was issuing a patent covering a revolutionary invention.  They call it a “vacuum cleaner.” 

I obviously have no idea what is patentable any more because I cannot see anything here in this invention that would or could be considered patentable, particularly in light of the Supreme Court’s fairly recent decision in KSR v. Teleflex, which says that if something is within the common sense of people skilled in the technical field of the invention then a patent should not issue.

While this cartoon may be funny, it speaks to a problem that is faced by many inventors and companies.  The key to making money with innovation is to be able to solve a problem that will lead to a product or service that others will be willing to pay for.  As Thomas Edison famously learned early in his career, inventing for the sake of inventing is not something that will lead to riches.  After one of Edison’s first inventions was a flop he vowed to never again invent anything without first researching and determining that there would be a demand for the invention or innovation.

I have been away on an extended business trip, and I have now just returned.  One of the stops on this trip was the headquarters of the Practising Law Institute (PLI) in New York City.  As some of you may know, I am the editor and blogger for the PLI Patent Practice Center.  On Monday and Tuesday of this week I was attending the Second Annual Patent Law Institute sponsored by PLI.  I was attending the various programs and blogging away all day. 

EDITORIAL NOTE: This is the first in a two part series that will attempt to answer a hypothetical copyright infringement question surrounding the movie and book “I am Legend.”  This post discusses the differences and similarities between the book and the movie and the next post (during the week of January 21, 2008) will address the law associated with determining whether there would have been copyright infringement.  If you have not seen the movie or read the book “I am Legend,” and you plan to, you probably do not want to read this post until you have.

Last week my husband and I went to the movies to see Will Smith in “I am Legend.”  I had received the book for Christmas and tried to get at least a third of the way through it before seeing the movie.  I was surprised in reading only the first few chapters to learn that there were quite a few differences between the movie and the book.

Yesterday, January 9, 2008, InventHelp® issued a press release explaining that one of its clients had invented a rotating lounge chair that would allow sun bathers to obtain a more even tan.  This press release is not terribly unique, InventHelp® issues such press releases from time to time so that inventors will believe their services to be valuable.  Unfortunately, InventHelp® is one of the more notorious of invention submission scams.