Comment Re:patent lawyers (Score 1) 407
pardon me sir, let me rephrase. what i'm attempting to patent is the concept by which this system that i designed works. my proof of concept was achieved via a bit of programming. that being said, my full disclosure was based around the implementation via the software i'd written. i'm not patenting the program itself, i'm patenting the means by which it functions (which doesn't have to be in the software domain, that was just easiest way to demonstrate its theory).
as for my being not being pitied, again, i think you misunderstand me. the prior art to which my patent is being compared, is for a very simple thing. but, since it was artfully worded, it encompasses far more than it's functional scope. it doesn't just impinge on my work, but on lots of other patents that have had to be reworked in order to fit within it's bounds.
i've not asked for pity, i've just stated a similarly frustrating patent issue in a similar vein to the posted story.
as for my being not being pitied, again, i think you misunderstand me. the prior art to which my patent is being compared, is for a very simple thing. but, since it was artfully worded, it encompasses far more than it's functional scope. it doesn't just impinge on my work, but on lots of other patents that have had to be reworked in order to fit within it's bounds.
i've not asked for pity, i've just stated a similarly frustrating patent issue in a similar vein to the posted story.
