Is The Pandora Patented ?


_David_

Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2007
Messages
119
Age
52
Location
Washington DC
Website
open-pandora.net
I was wondering if the Pandora was covered by any king of patent. The main problem would be that another company would come with a Pandora copy, and therefore compromise the Pandora's sale.

David
 
if they want to go through all this hell, theyre more then welcome to, im quite sure many people would even buy a fake pandora
 
What should/could be patented anyway? The control arrangement? I doubt it would be feasible.
 
You can't patent anything that is already public. You have to apply before making the device public.

The only thing you can do is say the logo is a trademark of OpenPandora, but even that is iffy as it's so close to some other trademarks.
 
Would you like the Pandora, or the concept of a gaming UMPC with the Pandora's features, to be patented? As a consumer, I wouldn't. What part of it do you think would have been patentable before it became public?
 
I had wondered if the i-control pad was patented as apple applied for their own patent of a similar device.
I think you can have worlwide patents or region specific patents.The controls and such are based on the pandora.Maybe some pandora components are patented.
 
Squidge said:
You can't patent anything that is already public. You have to apply before making the device public.

The only thing you can do is say the logo is a trademark of OpenPandora, but even that is iffy as it's so close to some other trademarks.

I'm not sure how it works in England, but this is no true for US ,you have one year from the time it goes public > http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/documents/appxl_35_U_S_C_102.htm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
From the link you posted, point 1: "A person shall be entitled to a patent unless: the invention was known or used by others in this country or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country", so it's the same as the UK. If people know about it (News posting, advertisement, etc), you can't patent it. You have to patent it first before other people know about it.

Point 2 talks about being on sale. The Pandora was clearly known by others years before being on sale.

Else you could end up with the following:

Company A produces device A.
Company B produces a better device A and calls it Device B 10 months later.
Company A then applies for a patent on device A and sues Company B.
 
Squidge said:
From the link you posted, point 1: "A person shall be entitled to a patent unless: the invention was known or used by others in this country or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country", so it's the same as the UK. If people know about it (News posting, advertisement, etc), you can't patent it. You have to patent it first before other people know about it.

Point 2 talks about being on sale. The Pandora was clearly known by others years before being on sale.

Else you could end up with the following:

Company A produces device A.
Company B produces a better device A and calls it Device B 10 months later.
Company A then applies for a patent on device A and sues Company B.
Let's hope that no Company B will ever exist, because Company A's clients may cancel their orders.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think we all can agree that the Pandora is really a niche market. No one is going to copy or try to better the Pandora just to sell a few thousand units. They'll want to sell millions.

(Craig then goes on to become the UK's 10th biggest company, with a market value of $38 billion...)
 
THE NUBS!!! PATENT THE NUBS!!!


that's about all I'd consider patenting since it is, by far, the most unique part of the device...
 
Custom Processing Unlimite said:
THE NUBS!!! PATENT THE NUBS!!!


that's about all I'd consider patenting since it is, by far, the most unique part of the device...
Before that, they should improve the nubs, maybe more metal and quality parts to make them unbreakable, THEN patent it. :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
PAtent the faulty nubs too - seems the units with 1 duff nub are selling quicker than the ones with 2 good nubs ;)
 
Custom Processing Unlimite said:
THE NUBS!!! PATENT THE NUBS!!!


that's about all I'd consider patenting since it is, by far, the most unique part of the device...
The D-Pad?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
TitanUranus said:
PAtent the faulty nubs too - seems the units with 1 duff nub are selling quicker than the ones with 2 good nubs ;)

I think you got "Number sold" versus "number shipped" confused. Nearly 4000 were sold with 2 nubs. As far as I've seen none have been sold with less than 2 working nubs, only ones shipped with less. Shipping less than 2 and selling less than 2 are technically 2 different things. Just goes to show how high demand it is that people would take less than what they paid for just to get one. Not something you want to patent. Although Apple might someday patent the idea of selling incomplete hardware to offset wait time. After all haven't they patented just about everything else...lol
Isn't it Apple's way to call failures, Features?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
About the i-control pad. How similar is the Apple device? A patent can easily be dismissed by prior art, so if it's to close, the Apple patent is no good. The i-control pad is a published concept and as such i believe it is a valid prior art item. Any working models would be a definitive prior art item.
B!
 
Mr B said:
About the i-control pad. How similar is the Apple device? A patent can easily be dismissed by prior art, so if it's to close, the Apple patent is no good. The i-control pad is a published concept and as such i believe it is a valid prior art item. Any working models would be a definitive prior art item.
B!
quite similar if i remember.heres a link to apples patent
My linkoh and WWW.icontrolpad.com
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mr B said:
A patent can easily be dismissed by prior art
For certain very difficult values of "easily".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, given that Apple will sue in Texas, or something, your probably right. It will still be easy, meaning that pretty much no matter how much money Apple throws at the thief's and crook... sorry, layers, they will still lose, but the defendant will be tied up in court for years with costs skyrocketing. The best bet would probably be to find a none profit organization that is willing to "help out" for a share of the publicity, or a thief and crook wanting to make himself a name in the business.

But looking through the design, and comparing. Most of what is in there isn't even design that is possible to patent over here in Sweden. Game consoles with upper and lower screens, old news, not a new concept, moving a button or changing the size isn't a reinvention, and so on. Oh, you can still fill, and file a patent like that. And pay to get it passed. But the first challenge to your patent would get it thrown out, faster then you could say it. And regardless of how you twist, turn, bend, and outright lie, the closest designs are definite prior art, even by US standards. So, that should be fun. Bet Apple wont respond at all for 6-18 months, and when they have a product on the market they will sue for copy right invasion, and pretend to be all suppriced that the product exists. Document everything sent to them, regardless of if they respond. Some traced letters would be nice as well.
B!
 
Back
Top