Now I'm not quite familiar with the patenting system, but does a patent require an idea/invention to have some type of concrete development? Or can a patent have any type of idea that requires no proof of actual existence? So if someone patents an idea called "technology accelerates the process of updating the display on a device," without any plan or physical product, then someone else just happens to develop that actual working product with no help or knowledge from the original patent, then that is considered patent violation?

yep, thats how it works, theres a little more to it. But essentially your on the money.

just too funny! just the other day there was an article on how they are sewing Palm over summin on the PRE! LMFAO! The viscous circle goes round & round!

I was under the impression that, although you didn't need to prove it worked you had to be specific. For example,

Quote:

---

So if someone patents an idea called "technology accelerates the process of updating the display on a device,

---

Would not work as it would be classified as too generic. Whereas,

Quote:

---

So if someone patents an idea called "technology accelerates the process of updating the display on a device by using infrared ,

---

Would work.

That was my impression of the laws, and is by no means guaranteed to be accurate :)

Originally posted by slickwill:

---

Now I'm not quite familiar with the patenting system, but does a patent require an idea/invention to have some type of concrete development? Or can a patent have any type of idea that requires no proof of actual existence? So if someone patents an idea called "technology accelerates the process of updating the display on a device," without any plan or physical product, then someone else just happens to develop that actual working product with no help or knowledge from the original patent, then that is considered patent violation?

---

I think you have to be much more specific than that.