As an example of how the patent system has evolved to address
the concerns the League raises, consider the Polaroid patent
which, they say, describes "differences in the number and
order of layers of chemical in a film-differences between the
technique Kodak was using and those described by previous expired
patents." The League says such differences were obvious. The
court held otherwise. Kodak could have avoided infringement by
using the order described in the earlier, expired, patent the
League refers to. Why would Kodak use the order described in the
later patent rather than the earlier one? Why would Polaroid
patent it? Could it have been better? This demonstrates three things to those who must deal with
patents. First, an active patent is a territorial warning.
Second, technology described in expired patents is in the public
domain. Third, patents protect the innovator. Polaroid was the
innovator in instant photography. Kodak wanted a share of that
market. The major obstacle was Polaroid patents. Kodak tried to
get too near the fire. Kodak got burned and paid Polaroid over
$900 million. (Last updated on 10/06/98) Intellectual Property Creators
Obviousness: Polaroid v. Kodak
Intellectual
Property Creators
www.ipcreators.org
101 First St., Suite 425
Los Altos, CA 94022
Voice: 650/948-8350
© Paul Heckel 1995-7