DOG NOSE ART
United
States Patent Application 20090188617
The kit and
method of converting dog nose smudges deposited on a first surface into a form
of dog nose art on a second surface. In
practical terms, the dog nose powder is applied to a dog’s nose then collected
on a surface for artistic purposes. Some
people use the art as memories of beloved dogs that pass away.
Validity: I tend
to think that this patent is less silly for those who are huge dog enthusiasts.
It is a valid idea as the art could possibly have buyers out there.
Anticipation: I believe there was little anticipation
for this art because it is fairly weird and obscure in my opinion, but there
may be other views on this.
Prior Art: Prior Art would not apply as much in this
case, as it is a fairly unique and specific invention.
Obviousness: This
patent is not obvious in my opinion.
Potential
Infringement: Infringement would
include another practicing entity selling dog nose art; however, most of the infringement
would most likely occur at the household level.
Hi! Great Blog Post! I like how you split up the post in different sections: Validity, Anticipation, Prior Art, Obviousness, and Potential Infringement. It made it really clear and easy to understand. Thanks for sharing this silly patent! I can't believe it got accepted.
ReplyDeleteMatt,
ReplyDeleteAlthough these silly patents do seem quite funny to the naked eye and do carry a lot of humorous value, we can never forget that they were granted by the USPTO. In relation to the actual patent, you did a great job analyzing the prior possibility of anticipation as no one would have probably ever thought to do this.
Cheers
Good patent choice Matt, I'm sure we have many dog lovers out there in the crowd. I would recommend a bit more detail next time when evaluating the patents, possibly redefining the definition of each just to help tie the concepts together.
ReplyDeleteGreat post - quick and to the point. Your clear division of the criteria for a patent made it very easy to comprehend. Even though the idea was silly, your analysis is very exact.
ReplyDelete