Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Mornin' all,

The above title is that of an article with a link to James Dyson's brief editorial piece in the Wall Street Journal.

http://blogs.wsj.com/in-charge/2011/02/14/vacuum-inventor-urges-patent-reform/

Venson

Hi Venson et al:

I am taking the liberty of posting the letter to the editor that James Dyson wrote and was printed in the WSJ yesterday, Monday February 14, 2011.

I fully support expediting the patent process ("Expediting U.S. Innovation Comes at a Cost," Small Business, Feb. 3), but the process should be as evenhanded as possible.

Protecting inventions is hard to do; it's a lengthy, expensive and frustrating process. It's not just the cost of filing patents, it's renewing them and seeking legal redress against copycats. Those costs multiply exponentially if you want to export an invention.

When I first started developing my vacuum cleaner, protecting and renewing my patents almost bankrupted me. Tired of seeing ideas stolen, I filed a petition at the European Court of Human Rights in the late 1990s against unfair patent-renewal costs. I argued that these costs make it impossible for an individual without funding to protect his technology. Unfortunately, my case was rejected.

New technology and global competition has spurred the pace and volume of invention dramatically. Governments and patent offices around the world need to respond with lower costs and quicker turnarounds. The Commerce Department is moving in the right direction, but the new policy doesn't help those who can't afford to fast track their ideas. Three years is a long time to wait for a patent.

Sir James Dyson

Founder and Chief Engineer

Dyson Ltd.

I had a chuckle after reading the letter because the case in point that immediately came to my mind is that of Kenneth J. a struggling engineer student who filed a patent in the US for a ball faciliatator in 1996 years before any dyson ball vacuum model.  Dyson had his high paid NYC lawyers with 3 names and 3 piece suits fight the suit by Kenneth J. before a DC court judge.  The judge ruled against the poor student in favor of the billionaire business man inventor on a legal technicality.  Leaving final patent infringement justice in the hands of the street and public opinion with sales of dyson's ball vacuums. 

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

Carmine, I guess we think alike rregarding the matter.  I tried to hold my peace as far as the forum was concerned and let the article and its links speak for themselves.  But, I did leavev my comment in an area provided.  My feeling is that Dyson, bunch of whiners that it is, was probably looking for ways to nail down things and thus find more avenues to bring competitors into court over picayune issues.  I also expressed my feeling that Dyson had merely picked up on an old idea -- cyclonics -- that had bee in use long before we heard his name.  As far as I'm concerned, Dyson took the old idea and shrunk it down to fit in a standard size vacuum,  That was an innovation but in no way, at least to my mind, an invention.

Despite JD's claim of nearly going broke to keep up with patent issues starting out, what could the cost mean to him now?  4,000 bucks to expedite the patent process can't gouge that big a hole in the bucket for him and it's highly doubtful that he's got a marathon going on from his office to patent office.  From what I gleaned from the whole thing, this editorial for WSJ, is but yet another "James Dyson said . . ." fluff piece to keep his name in the papers.

Venson

CarmineD wrote:

Carmine, I guess we think alike rregarding the matter.  I tried to hold my peace as far as the forum was concerned and let the article and its links speak for themselves.  But, I did leave a comment in an area provided.  My feeling is that Dyson, bunch of whiners that it is, was probably looking for ways to nail down things and thus find more avenues to bring competitors into court over picayune issues.  I also expressed my feeling that Dyson had merely picked up on an old idea -- cyclonics -- that had bee in use long before we heard his name.  As far as I'm concerned, Dyson took the old idea and shrunk it down to fit in a standard size vacuum,  That was an innovation but in no way, at least to my mind, an invention.

Despite JD's claim of nearly going broke to keep up with patent issues starting out, what could the cost mean to him now?  4,000 bucks to expedite the patent process can't gouge that big a hole in the bucket for him and it's highly doubtful that he's got a marathon going on from his office to patent office.  From what I gleaned from the whole thing, this editorial for WSJ, is but yet another "James Dyson said . . ." fluff piece to keep his name in the papers.

Venson

Prior to the tripling (and more) of patent application fees under the Reagan administration, I acquired a patent for 900.00 total, filing fees and all.  It took less then nine months from start to finish. I did my own drawings, just needed a little tweaking from the draftsman.
I was too late in my thinking. I designed a universal  wheeled adapter base for upright vacuums, with attachment storage and a feature to allow the vacuum to sit unaided in a stairwell.
Nine counts of originality out of 10 claims were granted.  US Patent Number 4,357,177 Nov 3, 1982.  The OBT uprights were already on the drawing board by then. The first one to appear was the Regina Housekeeper.

From that time until now the patent process has become so $#%*bersome and expensive that most US Patents are granted by reciprocity, after the inventor has acquired the patent overseas. How sad. James Dyson is not the first to screw the common man. Sears is famous for breaking patent owners, legally, spiritually, and financially.

Regards,

Trebor