Well, they say that you can patent anything at the US Patent Office. The EPO (European Patent Office) is known to be somewhat more restrictive. We have all seen funny bullets patented. But this thing, not being a bullet, is surely a winner!
Just another funny patent. Does it mean that if you carry a Glock with a loaded chamber like this inventor says, you have to pay a fee to him or you’ll be sued for patent infringment?
In the Glock related patent above I see that they have patented the “method” and not the actual item itself. I have seen more and more in recent years that inventors are patenting spcific methods and even going to great lengths to incorporate an odd method in their design so as to be able to patent the projectile and make it nearly impossible for anyone else to make such a projectile without using the patented method. I noticed one of these cases recently when I looked at the U.S. patent for the Libra Snail AP cartridge (#20060027132A1). The patent doesn’t really cover the bullet itself, it covers the “method of preparing at least one radial incision in the body of the bullet of the cartridge” - say that 10 times fast! Lawyers must make a killing writing these crazy patents up!
Not to mention the poor draftsman who has to figure out how to turn all the chicken sratch into understandable drawings !!
[quote=“schneider”]Well, they say that you can patent anything at the US Patent Office. The EPO (European Patent Office) is known to be somewhat more restrictive. We have all seen funny bullets patented. But this thing, not being a bullet, is surely a winner!
Well, this guy must be close to being Number 1:
“The user may even choose to produce a Tarzan-type yell while swinging in the manner described, which more accurately replicates swinging on vines in a dense jungle forest. Actual jungle forestry is not required.”
I didn’t like that patent storm site, I am a big fan of Google Patents. Same info, better delivery…
Google Patents is selective. About 10% of those ammunition patents that I look up as part of putting the IAA Journal together come back as no match with Google (searching using both the patent number and Inventor). I have no idea if that is deliberate, but suspect it is simply a problem in their search algorithm. Patent clerks have told me that they don’t use Google because of that. I normally use free patent online (freepatentsonline.com/search.html) as any patent that Google won’t give me, this site will. Presentation seems very good as well.
If you already have the patent number, you can also use the USPTO website. While the webpages for the older patents may not reprint the full text, you can still access images of the actual patent document. You’ll need either AlternaTIFF or Apple Quicktime installed to view the images.
I suspect many of the issues with Google Patents are due to the OCR program they use to make the text of the documents searchable. Older patents do not always have text legible enough for the OCR program to accurately recognize.