Friday Goofy: Melbourne man patents the wheel
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 571
Likes: 0
Friday Goofy: Melbourne man patents the wheel
STATE NEWS
Melbourne man patents the wheel
By NATHAN COCHRANE
Monday 2 July 2001
A Melbourne man has patented the wheel. Freelance patent attorney John Keogh was issued with an Innovation Patent for a "circular transportation facilitation device" within days of the new patent system being invoked in May.
But he has no immediate plans to patent fire, crop rotation or other fundamental advances in civilisation.
Mr Keogh said he patented the wheel to prove the innovation patent system was flawed because it did not need to be examined by the patent office, IP Australia.
"The patent office would be required to issue a patent for anything," he said. "All they're doing is putting a rubber stamp on it.
"The impetus came from the Federal Government. Their constituents claimed the cost of obtaining a patent was too high so the government decided to find a way to issue a patent more easily."
He said the name should be changed to "Registered Innovation", to avoid confusion with standard patents, which grant broad monopoly rights.
Standard patents have to be crafted by a registered patent attorney who has engineering or science qualifications. Patents must also show an inventive step, a significant advance. The innovation patent, which replaces the petty patent, has to show only an innovative step and can be prepared without professional help.
Commissioner of Patents Vivienne Thom would not comment on Mr Keogh's claims. But in an early statement she said small business has enjoyed lower costs because a lawyer did not have to be retained.
"Also, to obtain the patent the applicant must make a declaration that they are the inventor," Dr Thom said.
"Obtaining a patent for a wheel would require a false claim, which is a very serious matter and would certainly invalidate the patent as well as amount to a misrepresentation on the part of the applicant and unprofessional conduct by any professional adviser."
Mr Keogh is unrepentant. He said the patent office goaded patent attorneys into filing frivolous innovation patents during a roadshow last year to sell the concept. He said courts would have to decide the fate of the system when infringement suits were inevitably brought.
It could also lead to consumer confusion when marketers claimed a product was "patented".
Melbourne man patents the wheel
By NATHAN COCHRANE
Monday 2 July 2001
A Melbourne man has patented the wheel. Freelance patent attorney John Keogh was issued with an Innovation Patent for a "circular transportation facilitation device" within days of the new patent system being invoked in May.
But he has no immediate plans to patent fire, crop rotation or other fundamental advances in civilisation.
Mr Keogh said he patented the wheel to prove the innovation patent system was flawed because it did not need to be examined by the patent office, IP Australia.
"The patent office would be required to issue a patent for anything," he said. "All they're doing is putting a rubber stamp on it.
"The impetus came from the Federal Government. Their constituents claimed the cost of obtaining a patent was too high so the government decided to find a way to issue a patent more easily."
He said the name should be changed to "Registered Innovation", to avoid confusion with standard patents, which grant broad monopoly rights.
Standard patents have to be crafted by a registered patent attorney who has engineering or science qualifications. Patents must also show an inventive step, a significant advance. The innovation patent, which replaces the petty patent, has to show only an innovative step and can be prepared without professional help.
Commissioner of Patents Vivienne Thom would not comment on Mr Keogh's claims. But in an early statement she said small business has enjoyed lower costs because a lawyer did not have to be retained.
"Also, to obtain the patent the applicant must make a declaration that they are the inventor," Dr Thom said.
"Obtaining a patent for a wheel would require a false claim, which is a very serious matter and would certainly invalidate the patent as well as amount to a misrepresentation on the part of the applicant and unprofessional conduct by any professional adviser."
Mr Keogh is unrepentant. He said the patent office goaded patent attorneys into filing frivolous innovation patents during a roadshow last year to sell the concept. He said courts would have to decide the fate of the system when infringement suits were inevitably brought.
It could also lead to consumer confusion when marketers claimed a product was "patented".
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Big D
A4 (B6 Platform) Discussion
3
Feb 23, 2003 05:02 AM
