Showing posts with label patent. Show all posts
Showing posts with label patent. Show all posts

Thursday, July 20, 2017

Frances Gabe, Creator of the Only Self-Cleaning Home, Dies at 101; New York Times, July 18, 2017

Margalit Fox, New York Times; Frances Gabe, Creator of the Only Self-Cleaning Home, Dies at 101

"More than half a century ago, incensed by the housecleaning that was a woman’s chronic lot, Ms. Gabe began to dream of a house that would see to its own hygiene: tenderly washing, rinsing and drying itself at the touch of a button.

“Housework is a thankless, unending job,” she told The Ottawa Citizen in 1996. “It’s a nerve-twangling bore. Who wants it? Nobody!”

And so, with her own money and her own hands, she built just such a house, receiving United States patent 4,428,085 in 1984.

In a 1982 column about Ms. Gabe’s work, the humorist Erma Bombeck proposed her as “a new face for Mount Rushmore.”"

Friday, June 9, 2017

Intellectual Property 101: What Your Business Needs To Know About Copyright Law; Forbes, June 8, 2017

Art Neill, Forbes; Intellectual Property 101: What Your Business Needs To Know About Copyright Law

Co-authored with Teri Karobonik*

"Having an understanding of Intellectual Property law (IP) has become an essential skill for starting and growing a business. Many products,  technologies, and creative works you make are protected by one of the four types of Intellectual Property Law: copyright, trademark, patent, and trade secret.

Unlike “real property” law, which governs physical property and land (think “real estate”), intellectual property governs the use of creative and technical works as well as brands.

Whether you’re interested in reusing content from others, or trying to protect your own content and ideas, it’s critical that you understand which types of Intellectual Property might be in play. 

In the first part of this four part series, we’ll break down one of 4 main types of intellectual property, Copyright, and explain..."

Thursday, January 5, 2017

Robert L. Hulseman, Inventor of the Solo Cup, Dies at 84; New York Times, 12/30/16

Richard Sandomir, New York Tines; Robert L. Hulseman, Inventor of the Solo Cup, Dies at 84:

"Robert L. Hulseman, a corporate executive who developed the sturdy red Solo cup that became indispensable at picnics, tailgate parties and barbecues and inspired a song by the country singer Toby Keith, died on Dec. 21 at his home in Northfield, Ill. He was 84...

Mr. Hulseman spent nearly all of his career at the Solo Cup Company in Lake Forest, Ill., a maker of disposable cups, plates and bowls. One of his other legacies was helping to create a coffee cup lid that may now be as prevalent as the Solo cup.

The company’s products might have been seen as unremarkable party essentials in a throwaway age if not for the creation of the Solo cup in the mid-1970s. It became a mainstay at beer keggers, where its size, typically 16 ounces, durability and opacity were prized attributes.

Mr. Hulseman preferred that his cups be used at family outings, not at rowdy, boozy blowouts.

“The cup’s design was for strength,” Paul Hulseman said in an interview. “Not for a shot, a wine and a beer.”"

Friday, December 30, 2016

Amazon Is Considering Drone-Friendly Floating Warehouses; Fortune, 12/29/16

Don Reisinger, Fortune; Amazon Is Considering Drone-Friendly Floating Warehouses:

"The e-commerce giant has been awarded a patent that describes a logistics technology it calls "airborne fulfillment center (AFC)." The AFC is essentially in airship that's capable of flying at altitudes of 45,000 feet or more that would house items the company sells through its online marketplace. In the patent, Amazon describes a method by which drones would fly into the warehouse, pick up the items they need to deliver, and then deliver those items to the customer's home.


Amazon filed for the patent in 2014. While it was actually awarded in April, it wasn't discovered until Wednesday by CB Insights tech analyst Zoe Leavitt."

Wednesday, December 7, 2016

Still lovin’ it: Jim Delligatti’s Big Mac changed American culture; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 12/7/16

Editorial Board, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; Still lovin’ it: Jim Delligatti’s Big Mac changed American culture:
"Not content with McDonald’s menu, he invented the Big Mac even though the chain initially rebuffed his efforts and he had to hunt down a sesame-seed bun with enough brawn to contain the two all-beef patties, special sauce and extras he packed into the 550-calorie sandwich. It first sold in 1967 in his Uniontown restaurant, one of nearly 50 he came to own. The Big Mac was a smash hit, establishing Mr. Delligatti as one of the most important ingredients in McDonald’s success.
Surprisingly, Mr. Delligatti told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette in 1997 that he received no royalties from the sandwich that helped put the gold in McDonald’s arches. He received no big pay raise, either. “All I got was a plaque,” said Mr. Delligatti, who also developed the McDonald’s breakfast.
The Big Mac today is criticized for contributing to the nation’s obesity epidemic and couch-potato culture. Yet the Big Mac was a product of its time, and Mr. Delligatti did what inventors and entrepreneurs naturally do. He filled a niche, brilliantly."

Thursday, December 1, 2016

Australian students recreate Martin Shkreli price-hike drug in school lab; Guardian, 11/30/16

Melissa Davey, Guardian; Australian students recreate Martin Shkreli price-hike drug in school lab:
"He said the open nature of the project demystified science and revealed the number of roadblocks the students had faced in coming up with the final product, which involved three complicated chemical steps.
“With science results you can be presented with a polished finished product that hides the false steps along the way,” he said. “The students’ real-time diary highlights their whole process, and is a very transparent way of doing things.”...
He said unfortunately the students would not be able to sell their drug to the US market. While the drug can be bought in Australia for about A$13 for a packet of 50, there are a number of complicated legal roadblocks in the way of producing and selling it in the US.
“Turing has the exclusive rights to sell it, even though the drug is no longer under patent,” Todd said. “The ridiculousness of this legal loophole means if we wanted to launch it as drug in the US we’d have to go through a whole new clinical trial because we would have to compare the Sydney Grammar stuff with the officially sanctioned stuff, and Turing would have to give us the drug to allow those comparisons to be made."

Wednesday, October 22, 2014

Cloud Computing Is Forcing a Reconsideration of Intellectual Property; New York Times, 10/11/14

Quentin Hardy, New York Times; Cloud Computing Is Forcing a Reconsideration of Intellectual Property:
"Almost overnight, our technology revolution is shaking up entire industries and remaking society. Don’t get caught up in the small stuff, though: Tech really is changing how we think about our ideas.
We’ve used ideas to sculpt the globe since the Industrial Revolution, thanks largely to the way we handle intellectual property. When machines, and machines to make identical machines, mass-produced reliably identical goods, it was because people understood the same set of instructions.
Mass-produced books, music and movies were possible, too. Like machine-making instructions, these items were made reliable and protected with laws of copyright, patent and trademark.
Now, according to people involved in the business of protecting ideas, all of that is set to change.
Software, lashing together thousands of computer servers into fast and flexible cloud-computing systems, is the reason. Clouds, wirelessly connected to more software in just about everything, make it possible to shift, remix and borrow from once separate industrial categories."

Monday, February 22, 2010

Yo, Ho, Ho, and a Digital Scrum; Chronicle of Higher Education, 2/21/10

Jeffrey Young, Chronicle of Higher Education; Yo, Ho, Ho, and a Digital Scrum:

History shows that intellectual property is more complex than either its creators or copiers care to admit, says a Chicago scholar

"The history of publishing is swimming with pirates—far more than Adrian Johns expected when he started hunting through the archives for them. And he thinks their stories may hold keys to understanding the latest battles over digital publishing—and the future of the book.

Johns, a historian at the University of Chicago, has done much of his hunting from his office here, which is packed so high with books that the professor bought a rolling ladder to keep them in easy reach. He can rattle off a long list of noted pirates through the years:

Alexander Pope accused "pyrates" of publishing unauthorized copies of his work in the 18th century. At the beginning of the 19th century, a man known as the "king of the pirates" used the then-new technology of photolithography to spread cheap reprints of popular sheet music. In the 1950s, a pirate music label named Jolly Roger issued recordings by Louis Armstrong and other jazz greats from LP's that the major labels were no longer publishing. A similar label put out opera recordings smuggled from the Soviet bloc.

Along with the practice itself, "pirates" in publishing just keep resurfacing, and Johns argues that the label is no accident. He sees it as the pirates' attempt to evoke romantic notions of seafaring swashbucklers. Sure, the copying done by culture pirates may be technically illegal, but they have long claimed the moral high ground, arguing that they are not petty thieves, but principled heroes rightfully returning creative work to a public commons by making free or cheap copies available.

"There is an association with a certain kind of liberty—living perhaps alongside the law rather than in direct opposition to it," Johns says. "What the pirate community can represent is a kind of alternative that has its own virtues."

Johns has collected these and other pirate lessons in a new book, Piracy: The Intellectual Property Wars From Gutenberg to Gates (University of Chicago Press). The weighty work, more than 550 pages, covers hundreds of years of history of copyright and intellectual property in the West, focusing on the stories of those angling to disrupt prevailing practices.

The codified rules and laws allowing an author or publisher to claim exclusive rights to a literary work—what we now call "copyright"—did not develop until the 18th century, long after the printing press was invented. And since then the notion has been challenged again and again—sparking controversy long before the latest disputes over the pirating of music, movies, and other material over high-speed digital networks."

http://chronicle.com/article/Learning-From-Culture-Pirates/64294/