Friday, February 27, 2015

Personal view of the insulator cup patents

Hi guys, this is a post regarding my personal view on the list of patents I went through in the previous post.

Anticipation
This part relates to novelty. The patents listed in the previous post all have some kind of novelty to them, and that's why each got their own patent. Every patent's background found a current issue with the cups / sleeves and found a better or different way of solving problems.
The anticipation in many cases are design, but some are also the insulation and the technology behind everything.
Personally, I found interesting to see the different models of sleeves and was certainly amazed at how many patents are out there for just a sleeve. I thought a sleeve was a very mindless invention that is just a piece of paperboard, but in reality, there's quite a lot of engineering that goes into the invention.

Obviousness
This part relates to whether these patents are the same as one another. We can clearly see that each iteration of the sleeve patent seeks to create a better product, whether in functionality or design for the sleeve and the insulator cup. However, after all, all these patents are aimed at one simple thing which is an insulator sleeve.
As a result, the patents don't deviate too much from each other. But I still think that the little things matter, so even though they may not seem to be very different, each serves its own purpose and aims to achieve a different goal.
As I mentioned earlier, I never knew so much thought was put into an insulator sleeve, but after reading about them and further thinking and analyzing about them definitely opened my eyes. Personally, I thought this assignment was very interesting.


2 comments:

  1. Hey Michael!

    Great job synthesizing all of that reading! I had difficulties being as concise and can learn from your post in this aspect. Keep up the good work!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Oliviero,

      I like how you mention the concise nature of the post and how you were able to learn for it. What I would suggest is giving constructive criticism on how to improve. For example, knowing the definition of "obviousness", maybe to suggest clarification in obviousness in patents.

      Delete