Week 14 - Post 2: Smoker's Hat

        For my second post, I discovered a patent - U.S. patent 4,858,627 - for a "smoker's hat", which is a device meant to absorb the smoke from smoking any tobacco products.  Specifically, what is patented is, "a portable hat system [that] enables the smoking of tobacco type products without affecting the environment [that] includes a hat for covering the head of the smoker, an integral fan for intaking ambient air (contaminated and non contaminated) into the hat with this intake ambient air flowing in front of the smoker's face, a filtration, purification and deionization system for removal of combustion products, such as smoke odors and positive ions from the intake ambient air, and an exhaust system for expelling the filtered deodorized, deionized and optionally scented air from the hat."  Essentially, the smoker would where this "hat" on top of their head whenever they were smoking, and whenever they expelled smoke they would blow upwards into the hat, which would filter and then release the previously contaminated air.

        Now just how valid is a patent like this?  Upon examining the obviousness of this patent, I think it fair to say this patent is non-obvious.  Although smoking filtration devices exist, I have never heard of or imagined of a portable smoking filtration device, let alone one that goes on top of the wearer's head.  Moreover the fact that this is an electronically powered device makes this specific patent seem non-obvious to me personally, although one could argue that if a smoking filtration device were desired, that it would be attached to the smoker's face or head somehow.  Regarding the novelty of this device, I would imagine that nothing like this patent exactly has been previously described, although I would imagine that there would be potential for someone to have previously described or conceived of such a device.  Finally, we examine the usefulness of this device.  The filers of the patent argue that the device is beneficial to both the environment and to any persons in the vicinity of the smoker, with which I would agree - a device that absorbs smoke from the user would seem to be useful.  However I would question whether or not this device would ever truly be able to absorb 100% of the smoke, or even a significant enough amount of smoke to prevent the disturbance of nearby persons.  Also, this device seems enormous, and thus a tremendous inconvenience to the smoker who would have to wear this giant piece of metal on their head.  The filers suggest that the device could be used in settings such as "mass transit systems, such as commercial airlines, and social gatherings in theaters, restaurants, pubs, and the like", but what reasonable person would want to carry along such a device with them just to benefit the non-smokers around them?  Moreover in the instances that have been cited, wouldn't a device like this prove to be excessively noisy and disturbing to all persons present - such as in a theater?  Thus, I sincerely doubt the true usefulness of this patent, and for that reason alone I would find this patent invalid.

Link: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4858627.html

Week 14 - Post 1: Anti-Eating Face Mask Patent

      
        Since the theme for this week is silly patents, I've discovered a patent for "an anti-eating face mask which includes a cup-shaped member conforming to the shape of the mouth and chin area of the user, together with a hoop member and straps detachably engageable with a user's head for mounting the cup-shaped member in overlying relationship with the user's mouth and chin area under the nose thereby preventing the ingestion of food by the user." Patent 4,344,424 is a patent on a a device to prevent someone from eating, quite simply by attaching a metal cage to the mouth of the wearer through the use of head-straps. I find it hilarious that the goal of this patent, filed in 1980, is to combat obesity. This patent is apparently for those who must fight the "temptation... [of] compulsive eating..."; in other words this patent is for those who lack self-restraint to prevent them from overeating.

        Now we turn to the validity of this patent.  First off, regarding the obviousness of this patent: I would say that a patent like this seems fairly obvious for anyone whose goal is to prevent someone from eating.  If I wanted to prevent someone from eating with absolute success, I would obviously need to prevent food from entering the mouth, and I would likely go about this by putting something in front of the user's mouth to prevent food from entering.  Next I would need to ensure that it remains attached to the wearer's face; the head-straps seem like an obvious choice.  Thus I would argue that this patent is obvious, and thus invalid.  Regarding the usefulness of this patent, I admit this patent could potentially be useful to those who lack self-control when it comes to overeating, but I would argue that if someone truly lacked self-control to the degree that they need to attach a cage to their mouth, that person would just remove the mask from their face to eat.  If the wearer were unable to get the device off of their face, then I would question the ethical nature of this patent.  Finally, regarding the novelty of this patent, I feel that such a device must have been described sometime before 1980, however it was likely not for the purpose of preventing obesity.  Thus, I would conclude that this patent is likely invalid.

Link: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4344424.html