Great breakthrough from TI...

On a sunny day (Wed, 24 Jan 2007 11:39:24 +0100) it happened Fred Bartoli wrote in :

A sad day, that day that was issued. I think I have seen all of that as prior art way back in the sixties or seventies. The fact that there is a rush by these companies to patent _anything_ shows it is time do do away with the patent system as it is now.

Fig 3 is prior art as I learned it in school R1.C1 = R2.C2 for flat frequency slope.

Boycotting TI will likely not help and not be possible. Maybe WW3 will also clear patent offices. War _do_ have a purpose.

Next thing they'll do, is to patent Ohm's Law claiming that Ohm travelled in time and stollen their super advanced research :-)

I'm going to patent a way of applying a voltage across a cathode ray tube to get a deflection based on the output of this new innovative TI device :-).

And then a ramping sweep circuit.

In about 20 years, who knows, we might even have portable oscilliscopes!

Tim.

applying a voltage across a cathode ray

Sorry I don't have time to reply; I'm too busy inventing the Frisbee.

applying a voltage across a cathode ray

Hey, someone had enough spare time to patent "method of swinging on a swing", US number 6368227.

Tim.

Sad, but scary.

I understand that Bill Gates is busily patenting all prior art.

And you WILL like Vista ;-)

...Jim Thompson

-- | James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona Voice:(480)460-2350 | | | E-mail Address at Website Fax:(480)460-2142 | Brass Rat | |

will my old compensated scope probes be covered by this patent ?

Jure

It appears from their list of claims that they also claim the same circuit, but with FETs installed, and novel but useless ideas like grounding the output.

I wonder if this was a techno-guerrilla action by TI showing that patents in general are useless, since even this common circuit element can be patented.

That reminds me - I have a novel device around here I call a "switch" that might be worth patenting.

claims that they also claim the same

Followup - I was going to write a congratulatory letter to TI about this technical breakthrough, but after looking at the mini-biographies for the current members of the TI board of directors, I'm not sure anyone there would get the joke. It appears that the most common traits to become a member of the TI board are not engineering or scientific excellence, but rather past history as a university president or state governor.

Jim Thompson a écrit :

Sure. I already like Vista: I know one of my competitor has already dow... err upgraded to it.

Prior to this patetn CMOS designer did not use this technique, so as obvious as this patent appears, now it was not in 1996 in the RFIC cmos world.

THe USPO is the envy of the Free World and protects intellectual property, in the civilized free world. Why not create some, file a patent, and create value by selling prodcuts or licensing technology?

Marc Popek

On a sunny day (24 Jan 2007 08:08:46 -0800) it happened "jure" wrote in :

Maybe Tek can sue them?

On a sunny day (24 Jan 2007 08:11:26 -0800) it happened "Richard Henry" wrote in :

Has anyone patented 2 resistors in parallel yet ;-)?

On a sunny day (Wed, 24 Jan 2007 09:59:25 -0800) it happened LVMarc wrote in :

That is too obvious, and I actually used that (var FET resistance), long before that, in a variable filter. It is so obvious you cannot possibly call it 'new'. The problem is one for audio AGC with JFETS roll off at higher frequencies an issue with mixers in the 1970 ties.

Once we have patents in obvious applications of components, we are all dead in electronics design, because you cannot check for every 2 transistors if 'somebody already did it that way and patented it'. Same as all those trivial patents in software. All such a load of crap, it will kill the industry, and only enrich lawyers, make products more expensive, and kill the small companies.

Not so sure about that at all! Maybe not in a chip, but discrete why not.

That civilized free world leader killed 650000 people in Iraq. So much for 'civilized'.

Why not post to alt suck lawyers

Another circuit to encapsulate in epoxy potting glue. :) Who's going to dig carefully through epoxy to find out? D from BC

Regarding your point 3) Claim 1 is an independent claim, and does not refer to active devices. If active devices were an essential element of this patent then that claim would not have been allowed. The patent explicitly does cover the circuit without active devices, in claim 1.

Regarding your point 2) this just shows that the examiner didn't bother to read the reference, or more likely could not understand it.

Chris

claims that they also claim the same

congratulatory letter to TI about

If you want to get a rise out of them email the BOD asking them for permission to use their patent and who do I make the royalty check out to...

list of claims that they also claim the same

congratulatory letter to TI about

Notice the word "Followup" above, apparently in the middle of the line?

That is the residue of posting through the new Google Groups - the attribution marks are often fouled up. I have given up on googl;e groups and I have gone back to posting through outlook express on another account now.

Aside: I tried to send an complaint email, but Google apparently has no such address. My email to snipped-for-privacy@google.com got a rejection response, so I emailed snipped-for-privacy@google.com a warning that one of their employees was sabotaging the new release. I wonder what response I will get from that.

You'll have to bake a LOT of pies, first.