• Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size
Home Blog Obviousness


E-mail Print PDF

I just dug this one up:

...and quickly checked the public disclosure dates made to folks by the inventors on the now-defunct google wave (and personal emails to me) regarding their ideas. Seems as if they beat the 1-year deadline by a week or so based on those dates.

Despite the real possibility that the inventors missed the 1-year application deadline due to some other public disclosure I am not aware of, my limited knowledge of patent law means that since they disclosed prior to filing an application they would not be eligible for patent rights in japan or europe (where no 1-year grace period post-public disclosure is allowed).

It will also be interesting to follow the prosecution and see how the examiner decides on the topic of "obviousness". For example, I would consider myself as skilled in the art of determining CxA via virtual elevation methods (among other techniques), and the beta/wind problem is a well known one. This problem was one of the reasons I built this embedded system last year (complete with a BT radio to send results real-time to my smartphone):

Furthermore, I think the patent application misses the dependence of CxA on reynolds number, and Crr on speed+surface when creating a virtual elevation profile...ooh, maybe I should patent that!


...The clock's a ticking, now, though!



Last Updated on Saturday, 12 September 2015 14:30