|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, September 05 2012 @ 10:00 PM EDT |
Thus I am confused, a lot of people think an idea is patentable, but I think its
one or more implementations of an idea. Otherwise patents can't serve their
purpose which is to spur improvements. A better implementation improves
whatever for society.
On the issue of prior art, why is it relevant? I am only asking to understand.
For
example if in StarTrek they have an iPad like device, since that device on the
TV
show really isn't functional on design patents they might have some claim, but
how can it be prior art on utility patents when such devices for TV shows arn't
actually functional. So I am struggling to understand how props in TV shows or
movies can be prior art for utility patents.
On the Toshiba device I thought it projected the image, which is very different
from what both Apple or Samsung are doing with their technology, so I don't
understand why they are relevant?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|