Comments on: How is a Design Patent Different From a Utility Patent? http://patents101.com/2009/05/design-patent-different-from-utility-patent/ Patents101, Hyra IP's Patents Blog Mon, 06 Feb 2012 03:37:35 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.3 By: Clifford D. Hyra http://patents101.com/2009/05/design-patent-different-from-utility-patent/comment-page-1/#comment-394 Clifford D. Hyra Wed, 17 Jun 2009 20:23:16 +0000 http://patents101.com/?p=353#comment-394 George, Interesting, thank you for your comment. I agree that my wording could be improved. The tape drive would be visible and of commercial concern to the person buying it for production of tape recorders, although it is hidden when "used." George,

Interesting, thank you for your comment. I agree that my wording could be improved. The tape drive would be visible and of commercial concern to the person buying it for production of tape recorders, although it is hidden when “used.”

]]> By: George McCain http://patents101.com/2009/05/design-patent-different-from-utility-patent/comment-page-1/#comment-393 George McCain Wed, 17 Jun 2009 00:09:22 +0000 http://patents101.com/?p=353#comment-393 Your contention that design patents cannot protect hidden features isn't entirely true, see D,316,097, Tanaka et al. It's for a Tape Drive Unit for a Tape Recorder. A purchaser of the recorder never sees that tape drive when using the tape recorder but the ruling was that the "purchasing agent" saw the tape drive when making the decision to source it in quantity for production of tape recorders. Your contention that design patents cannot protect hidden features isn’t entirely true, see D,316,097, Tanaka et al. It’s for a Tape Drive Unit for a Tape Recorder. A purchaser of the recorder never sees that tape drive when using the tape recorder but the ruling was that the “purchasing agent” saw the tape drive when making the decision to source it in quantity for production of tape recorders.

]]>