Cancellara Caught??

Homer J

Maybe them dudes on "Myth Busters" should have a go

liversedge

RichN95 wrote:

You obviously didn't see the bit where I said I was a Senior Patent Examiner.

Oh that is the best post on this board, ever. Talk about pwned.

I'm still still giggling.

keef_zip

RichN95 wrote:

Steve2020 wrote:

As you will know, under patent law, any further patents related to it would require an 'inventive step' in order to be registered (or at least to withstand challenge if they were registered).

Hard to see where the 'inventive step' is in putting cylindrical batteries into a cylindrical tube, instead of a saddlebag. Presumably Gruber put them in a saddle bag not because of the technical difficulty of putting them in the downtube, but because of ease of charging etc for customers (who don't want to hide their use).

A switch is a switch - could be anywhere under the bar tape and not worth patenting. You just have to touch two wires together. Even old Dura Ace STI levers have the flightdeck electrical connections and button - not hard to imagine a switch. And not patentable.

So I don't see how those two modifications could be a) patentable or b) (if they were patented) worth millions. The motor is the really clever bit and we know it exists.

You obviously didn't see the bit where I said I was a Senior Patent Examiner.

1. There is quite a sizeable inventive step. I'm one of the people who decides whether there's an inventive step, so if I say there's one, there is - end of story. Perhaps you should have another read of Pozzoli.

2. A switch is not just a switch. There's a whole classification heading which is just switches (so probably 50-100 thousand patents). There's two people at the IPO who just deal with electrical connectors. The main guy is called Paul. I used to share an office with him. They're still backlogged though so a third person is currently helping them out - which, by coincidence, is me.

I do find it amusing when somebody tries to convince people that they're right based on their job title rather than facts.

Yes, you may be a 'senior' patent examiner, and you may have done a bit of searching, but given how many documents the UK patent office don't find compared with the European Patent Office, I wouldn't consider your searches to be conclusive.

In addition to that, given that (as I'm sure you'll know) patent applications are secret for the first 18 months after they are filed, if someone had filed an application for the motor idea, even you wouldn't be able to find it via your searches, if it had been filed within the past 18 months.

All you can conclude from your searches is that you've not found anything - not that nothing is there to be found.

As to your view that there must be a patent application for every invention created, that's just rubbish, and shows that you've not got any commercial outlook on inventions and the patent system (not unusual for a patent examiner). A fair number of my clients choose not to file patent applications for their ideas so that it remains a trade secret. Again, just because you can't find a patent application for an idea doesn't mean that the idea hasn't been conceived or reduced to a working product.

In any event, and for what it's worth, I don't think Fabian had a motor in his bike. Oh, and I'm a UK and European patent attorney - not that that matters, really.

ProBiker

Well said keef.

ProBiker

Special scanner to be Introduced in this years Tour de France.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_s ... 749048.stm

calvjones

keef_zip wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

Steve2020 wrote:

As you will know, under patent law, any further patents related to it would require an 'inventive step' in order to be registered (or at least to withstand challenge if they were registered).

Hard to see where the 'inventive step' is in putting cylindrical batteries into a cylindrical tube, instead of a saddlebag. Presumably Gruber put them in a saddle bag not because of the technical difficulty of putting them in the downtube, but because of ease of charging etc for customers (who don't want to hide their use).

A switch is a switch - could be anywhere under the bar tape and not worth patenting. You just have to touch two wires together. Even old Dura Ace STI levers have the flightdeck electrical connections and button - not hard to imagine a switch. And not patentable.

So I don't see how those two modifications could be a) patentable or b) (if they were patented) worth millions. The motor is the really clever bit and we know it exists.

You obviously didn't see the bit where I said I was a Senior Patent Examiner.

1. There is quite a sizeable inventive step. I'm one of the people who decides whether there's an inventive step, so if I say there's one, there is - end of story. Perhaps you should have another read of Pozzoli.

2. A switch is not just a switch. There's a whole classification heading which is just switches (so probably 50-100 thousand patents). There's two people at the IPO who just deal with electrical connectors. The main guy is called Paul. I used to share an office with him. They're still backlogged though so a third person is currently helping them out - which, by coincidence, is me.

I do find it amusing when somebody tries to convince people that they're right based on their job title rather than facts.

Oh, and I'm a UK and European patent attorney - not that that matters, really.

Homer J

^^^^ Busted and Owned

RichN95.

keef_zip wrote:

I do find it amusing when somebody tries to convince people that they're right based on their job title rather than facts.

Yes, you may be a 'senior' patent examiner, and you may have done a bit of searching, but given how many documents the UK patent office don't find compared with the European Patent Office, I wouldn't consider your searches to be conclusive.

In addition to that, given that (as I'm sure you'll know) patent applications are secret for the first 18 months after they are filed, if someone had filed an application for the motor idea, even you wouldn't be able to find it via your searches, if it had been filed within the past 18 months.

All you can conclude from your searches is that you've not found anything - not that nothing is there to be found.

As to your view that there must be a patent application for every invention created, that's just rubbish, and shows that you've not got any commercial outlook on inventions and the patent system (not unusual for a patent examiner). A fair number of my clients choose not to file patent applications for their ideas so that it remains a trade secret. Again, just because you can't find a patent application for an idea doesn't mean that the idea hasn't been conceived or reduced to a working product.

In any event, and for what it's worth, I don't think Fabian had a motor in his bike. Oh, and I'm a UK and European patent attorney - not that that matters, really.

I was quite hoping this thread would die it's deserved death with the moon landing hoaxers and creationists. However, some people think I have been 'owned' so I will reply.

Let's first consider what you quoted. I was disputing general patent law. If you think the poster was right with regard to inventive step, in view of Pozzoli and even Windsurfer, then please expalin whjy.

Secondly - "a switch is just a switch" - are you going to defend that statement in view of the ECLA classification H01H.

Now your more aggressive points: First up, my job certainly does make me more informed than the average person. I have access to the world's best patent search engine - which you don't.

Now- we miss documents that the EPO find. Not really all that true. We have the same search tools that the EPO have. They have three times as long to do a search, admittedly, but me match up very well. They miss things, we miss things, but it's very rare. You will have seen the stats showing that.

Now the 18 month thing. You're right there. But you're a Patent Attorney (it's interesting that you don't use the word 'Agent' like real Patent pros), so you don't actually look at many patent documents. I look at about 1000 a day, so I know that innovation progresses in small steps, not giant leaps.

I did a search in the field of electric bikes, a very small field of innovation. The closest thing I found was the Gruber Assist. No batteries in the tubes, no switches in the hoods. To get to the alleged Cancellara bike would have taken not one but three very big innovative jumps. There's nothing even close to what is necessary and as a result I say BS.

So Keef - three questions. a) do you think Cancellara, or any one, had a motorized bike? Ultimately, I was just trying to give some actual information to tin foil hat arguments of the gullible.

b) What is the major link between EPO (the drug) and patents?

c) Out of interest,who do you work for?


Question to Calvjones and HomerJ - do you have any idea what you're talking about or do you just believe what anyone says on here as fundamental truth with no actual knowledge of the subject matter..

Homer J

Since you ask. Trying to belittle someone with your "job title" has made you come across as a bit of a tw@t. And I find it funny that you got called out on it.

keef_zip

RichN95 wrote:

keef_zip wrote:

I do find it amusing when somebody tries to convince people that they're right based on their job title rather than facts.

Yes, you may be a 'senior' patent examiner, and you may have done a bit of searching, but given how many documents the UK patent office don't find compared with the European Patent Office, I wouldn't consider your searches to be conclusive.

In addition to that, given that (as I'm sure you'll know) patent applications are secret for the first 18 months after they are filed, if someone had filed an application for the motor idea, even you wouldn't be able to find it via your searches, if it had been filed within the past 18 months.

All you can conclude from your searches is that you've not found anything - not that nothing is there to be found.

As to your view that there must be a patent application for every invention created, that's just rubbish, and shows that you've not got any commercial outlook on inventions and the patent system (not unusual for a patent examiner). A fair number of my clients choose not to file patent applications for their ideas so that it remains a trade secret. Again, just because you can't find a patent application for an idea doesn't mean that the idea hasn't been conceived or reduced to a working product.

In any event, and for what it's worth, I don't think Fabian had a motor in his bike. Oh, and I'm a UK and European patent attorney - not that that matters, really.

I was quite hoping this thread would die it's deserved death with the moon landing hoaxers and creationists. However, some people think I have been 'owned' so I will reply.

Let's first consider what you quoted. I was disputing general patent law. If you think the poster was right with regard to inventive step, in view of Pozzoli and even Windsurfer, then please expalin whjy.

Secondly - "a switch is just a switch" - are you going to defend that statement in view of the ECLA classification H01H.

Now your more aggressive points: First up, my job certainly does make me more informed than the average person. I have access to the world's best patent search engine - which you don't.

Now- we miss documents that the EPO find. Not really all that true. We have the same search tools that the EPO have. They have three times as long to do a search, admittedly, but me match up very well. They miss things, we miss things, but it's very rare. You will have seen the stats showing that.

Now the 18 month thing. You're right there. But you're a Patent Attorney (it's interesting that you don't use the word 'Agent' like real Patent pros), so you don't actually look at many patent documents. I look at about 1000 a day, so I know that innovation progresses in small steps, not giant leaps.

I did a search in the field of electric bikes, a very small field of innovation. The closest thing I found was the Gruber Assist. No batteries in the tubes, no switches in the hoods. To get to the alleged Cancellara bike would have taken not one but three very big innovative jumps. There's nothing even close to what is necessary and as a result I say BS.

So Keef - three questions. a) do you think Cancellara, or any one, had a motorized bike? Ultimately, I was just trying to give some actual information to tin foil hat arguments of the gullible.

b) What is the major link between EPO (the drug) and patents?

c) Out of interest,who do you work for?


Question to Calvjones and HomerJ - do you have any idea what you're talking about or do you just believe what anyone says on here as fundamental truth with no actual knowledge of the subject matter..

Rich

The answer to your question a) is in my original post.

My main bone of contention was the 18 month period for publication which meant that you wouldn't/couldn't find everything. You didn't admit to that in your various earlier posts but rather asserted that because you didn't find it, it didn't exist. A flawed argument.

Yes, I am a patent 'attorney'. That's why my Institute is called the Chartered Insitute of Patent Attorneys and why the term "patent attorney" is protected by the CPDA 1988. Patent 'agent' is an older term which is not used much these days, certainly not between professionals.

I'm not going to tell you who I work for on an open forum, sorry. Work and personal life (i.e. forums) are separate.

Keef

paulcuthbert

RichN95 wrote:

Now- we miss documents that the EPO find

No no no... this is a "mechanical" doping thread

Eejit

pedro118118

For those who are fans of the Fox series 'Fringe', currently being screaned on Sky1, it isn't that much of a leap.

It is possible that Cancellara's bike has been created in an alternate universe and brought to the cobbles of northern France via artifically created 'soft spots' or cortexiphan-induced telekinesis.

Next year, I predict shapeshifting technologies, developed in the alternate universe will be put to good use by Bjarne Riis in Liege-Bastogne-Liege, when Massive Dynamic are confirmed as principal sponsor, replacing Saxo Bank.

Yellow Peril

It's got to be said RichN95 you have come across as a bit of a pompous ass with:

You obviously didn't see the bit where I said I was a Senior Patent Examiner.

All I can say is the forum obviously doesn't know that I'm the Lord God Almighty. I have been responsible for miracles such as the creation of the heavens and earth, parting of the red sea, plagues (various) and my own form of snooker which you on Earth call particle physics.

The Cancellara phenomena is my latest house miracle. I have combined effortless pedalling style with the speed of a pizza delivery boy moped and as a natural by-product, a host of sceptics. The same thing happened with a previous project...Armstrong of Nazareth.

Unfortunately it appears that FC, like JC before him, is also getting crucified.