Blue Light Blocking Patent issued 21 years later

[Chris Ryser]

Having made and sold, like others, a Blue-Blocker dye for 21 years I just run across a US patent issued in 2005. Interesting that the patent office lets somebody issue a patent on a article that been around forwever. Here is the abstract:

Inventor

• Pratt, Steven G.

US Patent Issued on October 18, 2005
Estimated Patent Expiration Date: April 25, 2023

Estimated Expiration Date is calculated based on simple USPTO term provisions. It does not account for terminal disclaimers, term adjustments, failure to pay maintenance fees, or other factors which might affect the term of a patent.


Abstract
An article of externally-worn eye wear, including, but not limited to, eyeglasses, sunglasses, goggles, and contact lenses. The eye wear includes a wavelength transmission blocker for blocking substantially all of light wavelengths throughout the [COLOR=#f26522! important][COLOR=#f26522! important]blue [COLOR=#f26522! important]light[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] spectrum. The wavelength transmission blocker protects the eyes against the harmful effect of the blocked light. Also, since the eye wear is worn externally from the eye, and the user can remove the eye wear, the user can selectively block the light. As such, the eye wear can be worn to block potentially harmful light, or the eye wear can be removed if blocking the light would cause other hazards.

See whole transcript at : http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6955430/fulltext.html

[chip anderson]

I have been told by various attorneys that one cannot patent things if one has told others about it, such as mentioning it on the web.

I am also pretty sure one cannot patent things that have been in common useage for 20 years.

I have also been told that no one ever patented the wheel~barrow (except for certian specific things like super zoomo, bearing and the like). But one cannot enforce a patent on the wheel~barrow as millions have been made and used for longer than we have a history to substansuate..

Chip

[shanbaum]

Chip, the difference is that every patent examiner would be aware of the existence of the wheelbarrow - but they can be remarkably thick when it comes to lesser-known articles. They seem to jump to the conclusion that if they've never heard of some invention, but find that neither it nor nothing like it has been patented, the invention is novel - which is frequently ridiculously wrong.