GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum - View Single Post

fiveyes · 10-20-2003, 06:28 AM

OK, here we go:

A queston came to my mind regarding http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showth...20#post2526220 where a showing of prior use less than year before the filing of the Arcacia application was considered not useable. However, this is not the case.

A correct reading of <A HREF="http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/35/102.html" target="_blank">35 USC 102</A>, shows that "prior use" is defined in part a.) and "prior art" is defined in part b.). The two differ in one major respect, examples of prior use only has to fall before the filing of the patent application, not a full year before. As, http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM...ters-9106.html puts it:
"<I>a person is not entitled to a patent if the invention was "known or used by others in this country, or was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country" before the date of invention by the applicant for the patent. If, for example, an invention is known or is being used by someone in the United States, another person who makes the same invention at a later date may not obtain a patent. Prior knowledge or use in a different country, however, is not a bar to a patent application in the United States. In contrast, a prior patent or a printed publication anywhere in the world will bar an applicant for patent in the United States if it appeared before the date of the applicant's invention.

Second, a patent is barred if "the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of the application for patent in the United States." This definition of prior art is similar to the first with one important distinction. In the first circumstance, the issue is whether the prior art was in existence before the date of invention. In the second circumstance, the issue is whether the prior art was in existence more than one year before the patent application was filed. There have been many cases in which an inventor has delayed in filing a patent application and has discovered, to his or her dismay, that the patent is barred because some other person put the invention into public use or described the invention in a printed publication after the patent applicant's invention but more than one year prior to the filing date of the patent application.</I>"

In other words, evidence of sound and video files being made available via FTP or bulletin boards _anytime_ throughout the year 1990 should be forwarded to the defense team.

10-20-2003, 06:28 AM
fiveyes Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: New Orleans Posts: 1,680	OK, here we go: A queston came to my mind regarding http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showth...20#post2526220 where a showing of prior use less than year before the filing of the Arcacia application was considered not useable. However, this is not the case. A correct reading of <A HREF="http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/35/102.html" target="_blank">35 USC 102</A>, shows that "prior use" is defined in part a.) and "prior art" is defined in part b.). The two differ in one major respect, examples of prior use only has to fall before the filing of the patent application, not a full year before. As, http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM...ters-9106.html puts it: "<I>a person is not entitled to a patent if the invention was "known or used by others in this country, or was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country" before the date of invention by the applicant for the patent. If, for example, an invention is known or is being used by someone in the United States, another person who makes the same invention at a later date may not obtain a patent. Prior knowledge or use in a different country, however, is not a bar to a patent application in the United States. In contrast, a prior patent or a printed publication anywhere in the world will bar an applicant for patent in the United States if it appeared before the date of the applicant's invention. Second, a patent is barred if "the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of the application for patent in the United States." This definition of prior art is similar to the first with one important distinction. In the first circumstance, the issue is whether the prior art was in existence before the date of invention. In the second circumstance, the issue is whether the prior art was in existence more than one year before the patent application was filed. There have been many cases in which an inventor has delayed in filing a patent application and has discovered, to his or her dismay, that the patent is barred because some other person put the invention into public use or described the invention in a printed publication after the patent applicant's invention but more than one year prior to the filing date of the patent application.</I>" In other words, evidence of sound and video files being made available via FTP or bulletin boards _anytime_ throughout the year 1990 should be forwarded to the defense team. __________________ <CENTER><A HREF="http://www.hot-off-bourbon.com/" target="_blank"><IMG SRC="http://www.hot-off-bourbon.com/images/hob-logosmall.jpg" border="0"></A> <FONT face="Comic Sans MS" SIZE="-1"><I>Mardi Gras, Spring Break, Wet-T, Night Club Action, UpSkirt, Oil Wrestling, Voyeur</I></FONT></CENTER>