On 7/30/07, shiv sastry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Monday 30 Jul 2007 7:47 pm, Lawnun wrote: > > The other question I have is whether patents are given for products or for > the > product plus the process by which that product is made. For example is it > possible to patent a single piece "blisk" for an aero engine without > revealing the process by which it is made? If so, little knowledge is > being
Yes. As a friend who's far more expert at this than I said, "you don't patent, for example, the engineering analysis that led you to choose the [blisk]," especially if the process itself is mundane, or already known. That doesn't mean that the knowledge isn't out there, or that the patentee is hiding the ball. My guess is, that if the examiner (who is usually knowledgeable in the art in question) can figure it out the process to make X, than the process is sufficently known that it does not need to be disclosed. But I'll happily defer and STFU if I'm wrong on that assumption. C
