In this blog, I consider the
economic ramifications for granting patents to inventions that may be novel but
very obvious.
The High-Five Machine is an
apparatus, which “allows a user to simulate a ‘high-five’ in celebration of a
positive event, thereby providing the user with a convenient outlet for the
release of excitement.” The motivation is the observation that people watching
sport event along can’t have high-fives. The mechanism is to use moldable
plastic or rubber material in shape of an average size human hand to provide a
pivotable, self-righting hand-arm configuration for simulating a “high five”
when struck by the hand of a user.
The mechanisms of how this
High-Five Machine works is very standardized and it should be obvious to person
skilled in part, mechanics in this case. However, this patent demonstrates that
patent is not all about high-level techniques or new discoveries, it can also
include reassembling of previous artisanship with a little bit of creativity. If the High-Five Machine offers the same excitement
outlet as that of human, it could make a lot of money for the inventor. On the
other hand, if the inventor charges a very high price for this product, it
produces unfair monopoly since the inventor really did not need to do much.
I really enjoy the fact that you provided a very descriptive and concise description of the patent that you chose. I also agree with you that even though this patent is a bit silly, it does show that patents in general do not always have to fulfill a serious purpose, but they can also make our lives a little happier too (:
ReplyDeleteGreat patent choice. Everyone needs a high five now and again. You did a good job describing the patent. Also, you included the motive that an inventor could have for creating such a device. Good work.
ReplyDeleteGreat analysis of this patent, Yi! I really like that you didn't just talk about how silly it was but really tried to get in the patent maker's head. I totally agree with you, the price of the product will definitely be the biggest factor in if this product may be successful in the market or not.
ReplyDeleteSuch an interesting patent to talk about. I like your analysis
ReplyDeleteAgree with most of the commentators above, your analysis was in-depth and to the point. In the future when discussing patents, I would include more about prior art as to provide more insight. Regardless, great work!
ReplyDeleteHey Yi,
ReplyDeleteI think the deep analysis you made was on point. I feel like you did a good job of explaining your concepts. Thanks for the post.
Hey! Great job explaining this silly patent. I also like how you explained your opinions. For example when you said, " If the High-Five Machine offers the same excitement outlet as that of human, it could make a lot of money for the inventor." Great Insight!!!
ReplyDeleteHi Yi,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your post! I like your optimism for this creation. Random but it could work
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHey Yi,
ReplyDeleteI couldn't agree more how silly this patent is! Great job on explaining and learned a lot from your post. Thank you!
Hey Yi,
DeleteThis is a pretty goofy patent. It's funny that you mentioned the concern of a monopoly- you generally wouldn't worry about a silly patent dominating a market. But you bring up an interesting point about how an idea that hasn't been implemented before can essentially be owned by one person.