Can a US Patent stop us from CNC engraving?

[Miowera]

Hello all, I posted a similar item over at Vetric. I have Vcarve S/w and am concerned that using it for the production of lithophanes will breach USA Patent 7,143,495.

A friend just told me that a bloke in the USA has patented the use of any CNC software and any CNC machine to do any form of relief engraving. I am concerned about the implications of this.

I understand that patents have a duty to identify prior art and that if anybody was producing Lithophanes (allthough the patent avoids this name with lots of fluffy words) prior to the date of the patent then the patent is invalid.

I am new to the world of CNC and need to clear this up before I can move forward.

Can anybody help?

Kindest regards
Miowera

[dertsap]

rip off of another one http://wikipatents.com/US-Patent-440...imagery/Page-1

[dertsap]

http://www3.hants.gov.uk/museum/cera...es-history.htm

[mezalick]

As posted on the Vectric forum,
I believe that this patent would be improper based on the following statements from the US Patent Office.

http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mp ... 901_02.htm

1901.02 Information Which Can Be Relied on in Protest
Any information which, in the protestor's opinion, would make the grant of a patent improper can be relied on in a protest under 37 CFR 1.291*.
The following are examples of the kinds of information, in addition to prior art documents, which can be relied on in a protest under 37 CFR 1.291*:

(A) Information demonstrating that the inven-tion was publicly "known or used by others in this country... before the invention thereof by the applicant for patent" and is therefore barred under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)

http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mp ... 901_02.htm

And also;

35 U.S.C. 102 Conditions for patentability; novelty and loss of right to patent.
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless -
(a) the invention was known or used by others in this country, or patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country, before the invention thereof by the applicant for patent, or

(f) he did not himself invent the subject matter sought to be patented,

http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mp ... #usc35s102


So,if some one was doing this before the Filing Date:03/05/2004 I think we are okay.
Michael

[Geof]

Originally Posted by mezalick .....So,if some one was doing this before the Filing Date:03/05/2004 I think we are okay. Michael

Yes and no. As far as I understand it even if a patent is issued in error it is still valid, the patent holder can sue for infringement and the onus is on the alleged infringer to prove the patent is not valid. Therefore if the patent owner has deep pockets and fancy lawyers they can intimidate people into paying license fees with the threat of a lawsuit that would be expensive and time consuming to fight.

Whether that will happen in this case is impossible to know at this stage.

[daedalus]

As you bought software to do lithopanes, you dont really need to worry about this, as its the software writer who will get the lawsuit, not the end user. That patent is a complete joke, just like the US patent system in general, and since you are in Aus, you really dont need to give a damn.

[KIMFAB]

Your lithopane patent is minor, here's a patent you need to concern yourself with.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/1418165.stm

[BobWarfield]

Originally Posted by Geof Yes and no. As far as I understand it even if a patent is issued in error it is still valid, the patent holder can sue for infringement and the onus is on the alleged infringer to prove the patent is not valid. Therefore if the patent owner has deep pockets and fancy lawyers they can intimidate people into paying license fees with the threat of a lawsuit that would be expensive and time consuming to fight. Whether that will happen in this case is impossible to know at this stage.

Yep, the system is asymmetrical in that it overwhelmingly favors the plaintiff. Typically, you have to deal with 2 defenses:

1) What I'm doing does not infringe this patent. Usual cost for a company just to get to the first day of the trial: $1M.

2) The patent should not have been granted. Cost to go this way: mid to high single digit millions.

Patent trolls are alive and well based on this ridiculous system. There are even publicly traded companies that do nothing but this ambulance chasing.

However, as was mentioned, Vectric are the ones to worry, not users of the software.

Best,

BW

[dertsap]

the software vendors doesnt have to worry because these programs are sold as wood working relief programs not lithophane software , what the end user uses the software for is out of the vendors hands , so really who can they chase down and sue and win , i think as Geof pointed out they can try intimidation but thats probably it

google " buy lithophane " and see what comes up , i don't think anyone is worried

[ihavenofish]

there was a company that patented website navigation. 99.9% of websites violate it.

they basically sent notices randomly to everyone. i dont think they ever attempted to sue, but just get a few suckers to pay out of fear. its kinda like those nigerian email scams, except dumber.

on the one hand, we want to respect peoples legitimate patents, because wed want them to respect ours. but "gotcha" patents are just an annoying scam. the software industry is full of them.

[ViperTX]

Well here are some earlier similar application for a patent and a US Patent.
(WO/2000/020185) LITHOPHANE-LIKE ARTICLE AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURE

6520049
The foreign application claims that lithophane dates back to the early 20th century where the stuff was hand carved.

So, they are probably many reasons why these patents would/could most likely be invalidated.

Oh, and the US Patent System is not a joke. Intellectual Property is important to all that develop it and most countries are working to make their IP offices similar to the US Patent Office so everyone's intellectual property can be protected.

Paul

[ihavenofish]

Originally Posted by ViperTX Oh, and the US Patent System is not a joke. Intellectual Property is important to all that develop it and most countries are working to make their IP offices similar to the US Patent Office so everyone's intellectual property can be protected. Paul

unfortunately easily abused and inaccessible to those without large sums of money at this point.