The first storyline patent has been applied for.

From the USPTO website itself:

So it’s finally come to this. First there were software patents, where Fraunhofer could patent the MP3 file format, and business method patents, where Amazon could patent one-click shopping. Nobody stepped up to prevent those abuses, nobody stepped up to reform the patent system and clean out the abuses, so now Andrew F. Knight is patenting a plot.

There is nothing in the recent behavior of the USPTO that suggests they would reject this patent. Nothing. That is why I’m Pitting it instead of treating it like the bad joke it is. If this is eventually rejected, I will celebrate and state in this thread just how wrong I was. I don’t think I’ll need to do that, and it frightens me.

I’m sure we can find plenty of prior art.

and a manner of new manufacture as well?

I was thinking of using this thread as a contest to find out who can name the most, and a betting pool on whether it makes a damned bit of difference.

You mean like the new examination guidelines (2 weeks old, I think) setting out what is statutory subject matter under 35 USC 101? Which this clearly is not?

People can apply for patents on whatever stupid thing they wish. It doesn’t mean they’ll get them.

How’s this for prior art?

In the unlikely event this patent is granted, wouldn’t it just be laughed out of court?

I am so gonna make a fortune.

When the USPTO rescinds the patent on the combover, you’ll have a leg to stand on. Statutes are only pertinent if the relevant bodies are willing to enforce them.

The patent on the combover is actually more defensible than this one, since it actually referrs to a physical process instead of an abstract idea. Correct me if I’m wrong, but under the system we originally had wasn’t it impossible to apply any sort of protection to an abstract idea? A patent (in days gone by) had to be applied to a physical object, a copyright could only be applied to an actual work of fiction or creativity, and a trademark could only be applied to an actual mark in use to distinguish goods or services in the marketplace. None of the three pillars, as originally concieved, applied to anything so abstract as a plot outline.

Sorry, I missed this the first time.

That only works if the defendent (or respondent, or whatever the accused party is called in a trial over a patent violation) has enough money to sink into defending himself in a courtroom. If he does not, the accuser wins by default and can reap the award. If TimeWarner or whoever decides to quash your competition, they can simply spend you into submission without any regard for who technically ‘wins’ or ‘loses’: They force you into penury and prevent you from doing what they didn’t like, winning the only victory that matters.

Cross-licensing deals and patent warchests prevent any of the large players from being hurt by this process.

Well crap! Everyone knows there are only 7 different stories in the world, and now FinnAgain and this Andrew F. Knight character have two of them.

I’m going to patent ‘two or three unbelievably saccharine furry animals go on an adventure with dubbed-over voices’. I am gonna own Disney.

It sure gave me a good chuckle.

I felt like I was reading an article off of The Onion but then I realized this couldn’t be The Onion because I was laughing too hard.

You can’t make shit like this up folks.

Bottom in A Midsummer Night’s Dream. Ooh, I’m gonna be rich - rich, I tells ya!

Hands off! I called them first!

I want to patent wacky farces that result in marriage. Hugh Grant will never work in Hollywood again.

You guys are pikers. I’m gonna patent the cop/combat vet/ blue-collar white guy has girl friend/comrade in arms/wife/family that gets killed by drug traffickers/terrorists/gangbangers and goes on a rampage to get revenge. Stallone? Schwarzenegger? Van Damme? Them boys gonna be my * bee-yotches … *

I must admit, I don’t get it. The heading mentions “the process of relating a story,” but not that the patent will cover the story. I don’t see how the story itself will pass the “utility” portion of the “novelty, utility, and nonobviousness” test, either.

And if he succeeds, the patent will last 20 years from the time of application, which is far, FAR shorter than the term of copyright (life plus 70 years). So, I fail to understand why someone would do this.

Tell me how the filed, AND GRANTED, patent on “Method of exercising a cat” with a laser pointer passed the “nonobvious” part of the test?

US intellectual property law is majorly fucked up. I won’t be suprised at all if this patent is granted.

Enjoy,
Steven

I’m going to patent the drive-by post.

Well, I’m patenting the nausetatingly happy ending after a series of very bad situations.

I’m also patenting the “childhood friends struggle with the supernatural up until a lame ending” plot.

Then I’ll have King and Spielberg by the balls.