Check out this video in regards to obviousness! Feel free to read my summary below to get a quick overview of the video! Thanks.
How different is your idea?
Two different requirements, you invention must be novel, but the second requirement is a little trickier, that your invention has to be non-obvious. Today we will only focus on the non-obvious portion.
Non-obvious means that whatever is different from your invention from what other people have done before, can't be something which is just an obvious leap or forward progression from prior models or inventions. It has to be something where there is more unexpectedness to it. So even if your invention is novel, and there is nothing exactly like it, there also needs to be a difference. Your invention must be non-obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the field of your invention.
There needs to be enough of a difference- so a person in the field cannot say "oh yes, that is something I would have easily imagined together".
Example
Say for instance you want to take clothes hangers and making them in smaller sizes for children's clothing. Yes, this may be novel because no one has done this before. However, it is the type of thing for people who manufacture clothes hangers know that they can make a hanger in any size. They just chose a particular size to standardize it. Therefore, changing the size of a clothes hanger would be obvious and non-patentable.
Why can this be confusing?
Sometimes, it can come down to a matter of opinion if something is obvious or not. Patent Attorneys often advise inventors about whether their inventions can pass the non-obviousness requirement of the Patent Office beforehand. This can get confusing for the average person. In order to really make this determination, you must identify and understand the closest things to your invention (also known as prior art) before you can determine if your invention is non-obvious.
That is all! I thought that this was a very clear and concise breakdown of obviousness. Hope you all enjoyed.
I like how you included how it can be very subjective to determine the obviousness of a patent. Also, you did a great job coming up with examples to help me better understand obviousness. Great work.
ReplyDeleteHi James - just wanted to reply to your comment here! Would be helpful if you gave Gabrielle some constructive advice on the post - maybe with some ideas for extra examples in the future :)
DeleteHi Gabrielle,
ReplyDeleteThanks for breaking down the question - understanding the hanger example even helped me to visualize what you were trying to convey, as I have realized how hard some of these concepts are to fathom without a good visual!
Gabby,
ReplyDeleteNice work on this one too. I could tell you had a deep understanding of obviousness, and you found a great video to exemplify it too. Cant wait to read what else you have planned.
Gabby,
ReplyDeleteI think that your vlog offered a great summary of the text of your post. Nice work! Also, you chose an excellent video to demonstrate the concepts of novelty and non-obviousness.