Weird patent for a weird spacecraft design

[vger]

So there are patent trolls... and then there are PATENT TROLLS.

[lajoswinkler]

Seriously, just because there is a patent for it does not imply any practicality, not even possibility.

Ditto.

I never understood why patent offices allow such crap to be patented.

[Tommygun]

Ditto.

I never understood why patent offices allow such crap to be patented.

I think they do this to stay impartial. While this is junk, sometimes it isn't so obvious and this puts the patent office in an awkward place.

Where do you draw the line between nut cases and something new that may just seem odd.

I can imagine the patent office in 1900 getting patent applications for flying machine parts.

[lajoswinkler]

Impartial to what? It only ruins the office's reputation. It probably has something to do with the kind of people that work there at some point in time. Einstein used to work in a such office and I doubt he allowed for nutters to ruin it.

[Tommygun]

Well different patent offices around the world may have different rules.

I get the impression that the US patent offices go by whether an idea is new, not if it will work.

I could see legal challenges being filed over a patent office decision of something not being workable.

The patent office could win easily over something like this, but that just means hiring more lawyers.

[ZetaX]

The patent office could win easily over something like this, but that just means hiring more lawyers.

Apart from the obvious "why should it care about its reputation¿ there is only one...", this is easily the reason why the US patent office probably doesn't even want to care about denying patents.

In most european courts, the loosing side has to pay the (standard) costs of the court case(s) [the judge and such itself, but most prominently the winning side's lawyer]. Thus you have not much to fear if you are sure to win the lawsuit.

[xcorps]

Impartial to what? It only ruins the office's reputation. It probably has something to do with the kind of people that work there at some point in time. Einstein used to work in a such office and I doubt he allowed for nutters to ruin it.

Um, what reputation? That's like saying the reputation of the Department of Transportation suffers because someone with epilepsy has a drivers license. The patent office is not a scientific body. It's a government entity that exists to protect a person from infringement upon his original work. It does not exist to approve, validate, test, verify or support any invention or idea. The Patent Office does not promote science or engineering. It exists to protect an individual. A patent does not apply to a thing. It applies to an idea.

Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.

Whoever includes whacky people with too much time on their hands.

Edited April 11, 2015 by xcorps

[KSK]

Ditto.

I never understood why patent offices allow such crap to be patented.

In this case - they haven't. It used to be the case that a US patent was only published once it had been allowed. For various reasons this was changed and now, like most other patent offices, the US publishes applications after 18 months and this happens automatically. So a published patent is not at all the same thing as an allowed patent. Check out the Google entry for that teleported patent - filed September 2004, published (approximately) 18 months later in April 2006. Since then - nothing. Whilst nobody would ever accuse a patent office of being quick off the mark, I'm guessing that if it hasn't been allowed in the nine years since publication, it's most likely been abandoned or rejected.

My guess - some examiner had a good laugh/face palm at this one before having the unenviable job of doing some kind of prior art search for it. After that it was published (because it had to be) and then sank without a trace.