did i invent these?

[Tubalcain2]

i was in the shop the other night and got a piece of 1/2'' round caught between my hammer and my anvil. this is what it looked like afterwards. my question is, has anyone seen a pair of tongs like this before or did i invent them? they work really well on flat stock. i'm hoping there original cause then i get to name them....

[John McPherson]

Seems to be a variation on billet tongs, but without a way to control the inevitable side swing.

[rockstar.esq]

I suspect it would be very difficult to come up with a completely original tong design. 

[SLAG]

Those tongs closely resemble universal tongs disclosed in the Florida blacksmiths "clinker breaker" newsletter.

Try http://www.blacksmithing.org/CB-Archive/1987/1987-04-cb.pdf to view a sketch of those tongs.

Mr.Rockstar is correct, as usual, there are many tongs that were invented in the past.

Try doing a patent search via google patents using the search term "tongs" or "blacksmith tongs" to view many such tools.

SLAG.

Honor out veterans.

 

[ThomasPowers]

I think you are centuries too late with the idea.

[Tubalcain2]

oh well.(sigh). there goes my dreams of being an inventor....

[Marc1]

It's all relative. You did invent it because you did not copy it. However may be others before you invented it too. An invention is called that when someone claims to be the first one. However how does he know he is the first one? Give enough lack of communications, insular culture or lack of historical records and you can have inventions that are reinvented a few times over. 

Did Gutenberg invent the printing press? Yes! Did someone else invent it before him? Yes! And so on and so forth.

Did Columbus discover America? Yes! And so did many other cultures before him ... ha ha ... like I said ... all is relative.

[ThomasPowers]

No you are an inventor; you just co-invented something... Happens all the time that people in different locations come up with the same or similar ideas.  Since blacksmithing has such a long span of talented people making things I pretty much never consider anything I come up with to be totally new; so I tell people don't be hung up on being *first*; work on being *best*!

The first pictured use of the crank in Western Europe predated the patenting of it by nearly 1000 years (look into why the early steam engines used the  epicyclic sun and planet gear system  and the crank depicted in use in the early medieval period in "Cathedral Forge and Waterwheel")

[SLAG]

T. P.

Sir Isaac Newton was forced to use the sun and planet linkage for his steam engines because someone had received a British patent for the crank!  And that someone refused to grant him a licence.

The crank goes back to at least 1,000 A.D., and probably much earlier (why the Romans and earlier the Greeks had not thought of that idea is a mystery). 

In the 1700's, and earlier, a person could receive a patent if he was the first person to bring the invention into England. Novelty was not a requirement then. (that is, a prior disclosure).

Any patent that has expired allows anyone to work the invention's idea. It is in the public domain. Getting an extended patent coverage term, is very rare and is only granted for some pharmaceuticals

Jade has a peculiar consistency. The mineral is fibrous and the grain is interlocking. That makes it a very tough substance. It also makes it difficult to carve.

Thomas is your local jade nephrite or the more common jadeite?

Cheerful regards to all,

SLAG.

[turbo7]

"Want to invent something new? Read an old book" 

Not mine.

[SLAG]

CORRECTION:

I meant to say James Watt not Sir Isaac Newton.

Sorry for the brain lapse.

SLAG

Isn't dyslexia wonderful ?

[ThomasPowers]

Yes I know that; I've even been and seen Watt's workshop moved to a museum in London, UK. Very disheartening; he changed the World with a workshop so much smaller and less well tooled than mine and I'm lucky to change fonts.... 

[Abby Babby]

I've invented alot of things, so far the Patent Lawyers are the only ones making money.

[PapaDooks]

just look at forge welded steel being used for making weapons. was invented in both europe and asia and i think the middle east aswell. slightly different method's but same idea. 

[JHCC]

I remember reading something a while back about how the Ancient Greeks supposedly invented toast. To which I say, "Anyone with bread and fire is going to figure out toast on their own, thank you very much."

[SLAG]

Abby Babby,

Concerning your quote,

'I've invented a lot of things, so far the Patent Lawyers are the only ones making money".

You have got to be kidding.

For an example, Mr. Dyson,  made well more then a billion dollars inventing and marketing the bag-less vacuum cleaner a while back. He is not a patent agent nor a patent lawyer.

Have you done a patent search to see if your inventive idea has already been thought and "published" by someone else?

Old ideas cannot be patented.

If it was invented, disclosed by some one else, it is time to move onto your next idea. Google patent is a good place to search.

SLAG.

(retired patent wallah).

 

[ThomasPowers]

With the old bloomery method of making wrought iron:

you start with the bloom and forge it out into a muck bar.

You cut and stack the muck bar and forge weld it and draw it out into a merchant bar (what was generally sold, hence the name)

You cut and stack the merchant bar and forge weld it and draw it out into a bar of "singly refined wrought iron"

 

You cut and stack the singly refined wrought iron bar and forge weld it and draw it out into a bar of "doubly refined wrought iron"

You cut and stack the doubly refined wrought iron bar and forge weld it and draw it out into a bar of "triply refined wrought iron"---what Yellin specified using IIRC

usw

So pretty much *every* culture that used the bloomery method of ironmaking came up with or used pattern welding as well. NOT a surprise to me.

Slag, ISTR the reason Watt used the planetary gear system on his steam engines was that someone had patented the crank---about 800+ years after it was first displayed as a marginal drawing on a manuscript and Watt did not want to go the license route. So at least in that instance old ideas did get patented!

[SLAG]

Note for Thomas Powers:

The Statute Of Monopolies May 25, 1624 first allowed for patents in England to only the true inventor of the concept, and It, ALSO, awarded patent protection for the first person to disclose an inventive idea into England. 

Please see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_Monopolies for a gripping narrative of the statute and its history.

Before that statute, the Crown could issue a monopoly for any thing, to whoever convinced the crown to award it to them. Queen Elizabeth 1 and, James 2, and Charles 1 widely abused their power and issued monopolies, to Their favorites, for all manner of common, well known and long used items

The latter ground was abolished in the later part of the eighteenth century.

Before that change in the law. some character to took out an English patent for the crank even though it had been invented around the year 1,000 A.D.

James Watt got around this problem by resorting to the sun and planet gear linkage.

Incidentally, he was not the inventor of the steam engine. Savary and also Newcomen had made that invention. But he did invent a vital improvement that of the separate condenser

I know of NO country, in the whole world, that, today, allows the patenting of an old idea. Novelty is an essential requirement for the granting of patents World-Wide

In most countries, that requirement is absolute novelty.

An interesting case for the invalidation of an important patent is Wandscheer v. Windsurfing International. That case was a patent infringement action of the patent for the sail board. The defendant corporation's lawyers proved lack of novelty by showing a picture of a boy sailing his sail board in the Lake District long before the patent was first filed or the date of invention. The corresponding patents were invalidated world-wide.

I trust that this note clarifies the narrative.

SLAG.

 

 

[ThomasPowers]

Good depiction of the crank in use in the mid 9th century Utrecht Psalter where the wicked are using the "old tech" whetstones to sharpen their swords and the righteous are using the "high tech" rotary grindstone to sharpen theirs.  ("Cathedral Forge and Waterwheel' Gies & Gies)

[SLAG]

T. P.,

Thanks for the heads up.

So the crank is older than 1,000 A.D. interesting.

The inventor is lost to history.

It took a long time to come up with the concept.

SLAG.

I'll get Gies ... by inter-library loan soon

[Abby Babby]

On 4/7/2017 at 10:31 AM, SLAG said:

Abby Babby,

Concerning your quote,

'I've invented a lot of things, so far the Patent Lawyers are the only ones making money".

 

You know, I never would have thought to do a Patent search, how could have I missed that. Holding 26 patents one would think I would have a bit of understanding how the patent systems work. Your sage advice will come in very hand next time I submit for another patent. 

[Charles R. Stevens]

Well, DNA is a rather old and not particularly novel invention but companies are alwed to steal natures invention and patent it. It has made Monsanto billions. 

[Frosty]

Slag: Aren't there "Application Patents"? I THINK that's the term I'm looking for, darned aphasia. Patenting a new/novel use for a known device is what I'm referring to. An old friend made decent extra money after finding new applications for old devices.

That's how I ended up with a small box of material about naturally aspirated devices, he was looking for a new application. Unfortunately he wanted one to develop high pressure which is a no can do for a transparent air mover. A good example of application patents I'm aware of have to do with what is called an "Air Amplifier" in the material Cruz gave me.

One application is for moving granular material at high speed and volume. It does so by making a very strong laminar flow on the inside walls of round pipe. It's been the way grain is moved for some time and another patent was issued for milling grain. They simply sped the flow up considerably and instead of making curved turns fired the grain into steel plates. Other granular materials are moved this way as well but not liquids but things may have changed since last time I looked. 

Another application patent(s?) using the Air Amplifier are Mr. Dyson's products. Mr. Dyson only invented how HE uses the device.

So, that's my question for you Slag. Can you be granted an "Application" patent or am looking at something else? Thanks for granting us your expertise.

Frosty The Lucky.

[SLAG]

Mssrs.  Abby, Frosty, & Stevens,  Greetings!,

Corporations and independent inventors usually conduct patent searches, soon after determining that they wish to develop an inventive idea, or have thought of an inventive idea.

Patent searches at that early stage saves money and much effort. There is no point working on an inventive idea if it is not new & thus not patentable. The same is true for searching technical journals too,

Patent office archives are wonderful sources for ideas.

Frosty, a new use for an old concept is indeed patentable. The majority of patents are concerned with improvements.

But the improvement must be inventive. There must be sufficient inventiveness to merit a patent. For example, putting a fifth leg under the center of the seat would merit a patent as it is not novel nor better the chair.

But "borrowing" a known concept, for example, cyclonic separation and adapting it to a totally different purpose was/is patentable.

Mr. Dyson, an Australian, was well aware of the huge cyclonic separators used in processing sugar cane. He took the cyclonic concept and devised a hand vacuum cleaner to use it. This improvement  did away with the need for filters and filter bags. There was a lot of invention to develop that device. His vacuum cleaners are vastly different from the sugar cane machines.

In other word he did not discover the concept of cyclonic separation, he invented a device that utilized it for a new purpose.

Incidentally, he is, now, a billionaire.

OOPS! I mentioned him in a previous post on this thread. SORRY.

That whole area of patent theory is called obviousness. (= inventiveness), Obviousness is a fascinating & complicated area of patent law. It also concerns itself with the specific facts of each given invention /patent application. A person could write books concerning obviousness, it's a vast area of law.

Mr. Stevens, Monsanto did not patent the chemical D.N.A.     D.N.A. 's structure and function was elucidated before 1954. Monsanto  took a portion of that chemical and stitched it into the D.N.A of another plant. That is inventive. I seem to remember that they modified the original D.N.A. while doing so, too. Doing that required ingenuity and much experimentation.

If there are any other questions on this subject, bring them on.

Regards to all.

SLAG.

[BIGGUNDOCTOR]

I was told by two of my customers that they would never go through getting another patent because of the cost involved, and they did not give you enough protection in today's global market.

I have over 70 ideas written down for products and services. Over the years some have been co-invented by others and brought to market. Not exactly like my versions , but close enough.  And that is part of the rub with patents. Close is good enough in many cases to get around a patent, as long as it is not a direct copy.