Hacker News Reader

Comment by Spivak | Hacker News Reader

I don't think the idea "battery powered coffee grinder" is patentable but why shouldn't the unique details of the implementation be covered?

Assuming that patents were actually useful as method of sharing useful designs with the world wouldn't you want to know how to overcome the engineering challenges?

View on HN

I agree it probably isn't patentable. It's an analogy that a lot of software tech companies these days can make a good business by putting some frameworks together with a database and solve real problems that used to be solved by other tools, and make good money and valuable products in the process. But depending on your opinion of battery powered coffee grinders, it's not necessarily new technology.

I'd love to see a patent as you describe that has not been found invalid in a PTAB or Art. III court proceeding

When did I say I'm describing a patent? In fact I specifically said that category of new product is usually not patentable. I'm responding to the below claim:

> most new technology is just software

"Battery powered coffee grinder" but worse: "battery powered drill, but with Li instead of NiMH" Milwaukee Tool v. Snap On (lots of commentary, here's one example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9CLvU5-FRo )

On the software side, AFAIK the infamous "One Click" patent was never held up in court, but companies had to spend significant money defending against lawsuits based on it (and therefore the only possible victory was pyrrhic).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com