patent law in this country is a big mess (years ago i went fairly far down the path of the patent process for some saxophone designs).

the issues (as i see them) are: (some of this may have changed in the last 15 years, especially as it applies to software and bioengineering)

1.  a granted patent doesn't provide any actual protection, it gives the patent holder a grounds to sue someone they see as violating the patent.

2.  most patents that are contested in court are found "unpatentable"...which means the patent holder spent several thousands of dollars to get the patent, someone else found it profitable to violate the patent, and when the holder spends another chunk of change to defend the patent in court, the judge decides there is no patent.

3. in order for something to be patentable, it must be "novel" (new), and not obvious to someone "skilled in the art" (ie, it can't be so obvious as a hivetool/backscratcher).

so, even if these patents are granted, if in fact this is all "prior art" (ie, the formulas can be proven to be preexisting on a website, article, or book) _or_ if the judge can be convinced that this is not innovation, but in fact using the most obvious sources of protein and other nutrients that anyone expert in bee nutrition would know offhand, then the patent will be found invalid in court.

but

someone has to first violate the patent, be taken to court by the patent holder, defend themselves, and convince a judge.

in many many cases, the patent holder knows that the patent wouldn't hold up in court, but knows that if a larger company wants to use the patented process, they will be better off buying or licensing the patent.  this way, there is no court battle, and the larger company has some leverage (the inconvenience/expense/unknown outcome of court) to pressure others from not violating the patent.  the bigger the company, the more able they are to defend the patent (even if it is unpatentable).

in my case, i got fairly deep into the process, got a job in part because of it, and decided that if anyone was going to violate my patent, it would be yamaha music.  i don't have the cash to sue yamaha..and decided to drop the whole thing before spending a few more thousand dollars.

imho, anything done with government funds should be completely ineligible for private patenting....as far as i can tell, what was done with megabee is pathetic and should be criminal.

the most interesting part of all of this is that if you apply for a patent, you basically have to disclose everything you are doing (otherwise, how can you define what your intellectual property is?).  you can't have a process/product that is both patented and secret...if the secret formula for coke were patented, it wouldn't be secret, it would be laid out specifically in public documents.

the lesson is that if you really have something unique and not obvious, you might be better off not patenting it at all...like nike says, "just do it".


deknow


____________________________________________________________
Diet Help
Reach your goals of being healthier and happier. Click here for diet tips and solutions.
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2241/c?cp=DKVizkVz0rPHfDrr_s4gnwAAJ1GYh4LMlrx5Sko2bwEETtn7AAYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYQAAAAAA=

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html

Access BEE-L directly at:
http://community.lsoft.com/scripts/wa-LSOFTDONATIONS.exe?A0=BEE-L