Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Court Denies Smucker's PB&J Patent

Zonk posted more than 9 years ago | from the line-in-the-sand dept.

The Courts 388

lbmouse writes "The AP is reporting that on Friday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit rejected an effort by the Jelly & Jam maker to patent its process for making pocket peanut butter and jelly sandwiches." While the company was only trying to patent the "crimping process" used to create a specific type of mass market sandwich, they had also "...asked Albie's Foods of Gaylord, Mich., to stop producing ready-made PB&J sandwiches for a school district".

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

OMG! (4, Funny)

Prophetic_Truth (822032) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184106)

There's only one way to celebrate...You know it..

IT'S PEANUT BUTTER JELLY TIME! [ebaumsworld.com]

Re:OMG! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184342)

Oh yay, eBaumsWorld =/

Re:OMG! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184346)

Man, I think that just gave me ADD, is that possible?

Re:OMG! (3, Insightful)

eexlebots (203658) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184413)

ohh awesome ebaum, the site for ripping off other people's content and even editing out the creators/original watermarks and replacing it with a url for their shitty site!

Hell it is still kinda
amusing I guess

dot dot dot (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184109)

what do peanut butter and jelly sandwiches have to do with my rights online?

Re:dot dot dot (3, Funny)

stephenMF (547151) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184114)

Food crumbs in the keyboard.

Re:dot dot dot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184370)

Damn straight! Food crumbs in keyboards have every right to be online, the whole of AOL's business plan is based on that.

Re:dot dot dot (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184224)

what do peanut butter and jelly sandwiches have to do with my rights online?

The same thing that canaries have to do with coal mines.

What's next - patenting how Mom makes Hash Brown's (5, Informative)

Hulkster (722642) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184110)

Maybe I can sue anyone who tries to use the technique my Mom uses for making Hash Browns?!? [komar.org]

For those that don't RTFA, Smucker actually allready had a patent from 1995, but this rejection "involved two additional patents that Smucker was seeking to expand its original patent by protecting its method." I.e. they still have the original patent for their method of making a P&J sandwich, but "the company's original patent is being re-examined by the patent office."

Hulk SMASH Celiac Disease [komar.org]

Re:What's next - patenting how Mom makes Hash Brow (5, Informative)

TheWanderingHermit (513872) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184265)

Yes, you're right.

One major point on the patent was that, when making a PBJ, the J seeps through the bread. To solve that problem, Smuckers put PB on BOTH pieces of bread.

And patented that!

They got a patent on putting PB on both bread slices instead of just one!

And we wonder how the one-click-order got patented!

Re:What's next - patenting how Mom makes Hash Brow (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184387)

Thanks for the recipe and, more importantly, the pic of your hot mom making the hash browns.

Damn.. (4, Funny)

shbazjinkens (776313) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184111)

There goes my chances of patenting the BLT.

Re:Damn.. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184189)

Yeah, its about 7:49:59 AM Baghdad Local Time.

Re:Damn.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184243)

Babe, Lettuce, and Tomato?

My apologies to David Letterman...

Re:Damn.. (1)

TheWanderingHermit (513872) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184286)

So is the babe wearing only lettuce and tomato?

I'll buy that for a dollar.

Re:Damn.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184306)

Babe referring to the pig, not uh... cannibalism.

Oh man (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184113)

There goes my patent on grilled cheese.

In a post 9/11 world... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184120)

In a post 9/11 world, police arrest peanut butter and jelly.

Re:In a post 9/11 world... (0, Redundant)

bokane (36382) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184161)

In Soviet Union, Peanut Butter and Jelly eat YOU!

(Thank you, thank you. For my next number, I'll need a Beowulf cluster of peanut butter and jelly sandwiches...)

Re:In a post 9/11 world... (0)

ebrandsberg (75344) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184193)

Yes, but do they run Linux?

Re:In a post 9/11 world... (0, Redundant)

tardigrades (841826) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184217)

no no no. In Soviet Union, Sandwiches crimp you!

Re:In a post 9/11 world... (2, Funny)

the MaD HuNGaRIaN (311517) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184245)

No no no...

In Soviet Russia, Crimps sandwich you!

Re:In a post 9/11 world... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184171)

In Soviet Russia, peanut butter and jelly stick to YOU!

Jesus! (5, Insightful)

John Seminal (698722) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184127)

asked Albie's Foods of Gaylord, Mich., to stop producing ready-made PB&J sandwiches for a school district

I am ready to join the protesters who want to destroy corporate america. The ones who go to G7 meetings and economic forums and fight the nasty police. If some asshole wants to deprive me of the right to a PB&J sandwich because they have a patent, motherfuck them. The corporations have too much power. Too many lobbyists. And the laws are getting rediculous.

Re:Jesus! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184380)

I would like to protest the people who can't spell RIDICULOUS. Do you pronounce it that way too? RED-iculous?

US Army... (4, Informative)

The Hobo (783784) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184131)

I once saw a show on the television that said the US army already crimps PB&J sandwiches as a type of combat ration... they last for a while, apparently!

Re:US Army... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184252)

I once saw a show on the televison that said people are Soylent Green... they are tasty, apparently!

I don't understand.. (1, Redundant)

vrunt (830476) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184132)

What right would Smucker's have to ask Albie's to stop making sandwiches? If someone else is already using an idea, can it still be patented? Is the U.S. Patent system really that backwards?

Re:I don't understand.. (1)

sharkb8 (723587) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184172)

THe patent office doesn't accept Food as proof of prior art. There must be something published describing how the special PB&J is made. The patent tradeoff is telling people how you made/did something inventive for a 20 year monopoly.

Re:I don't understand.. (4, Informative)

wdd1040 (640641) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184188)

Is the U.S. Patent system really that backwards?

Yes.

Re:I don't understand.. (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184258)

As if you actually know or understand the patent system. Theres lots wrong with it, but, please, go read up on it before you go pretending you know anything at all.

Re:I don't understand.. (1)

NitsujTPU (19263) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184360)

You must be new here.

As an aussie (2, Informative)

G-funk (22712) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184134)

I have to ask, what in the bloody hell is a "pocket" peanut butter and jam sandiwch?

Re:As an aussie (1)

soniCron88 (870042) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184157)

" I have to ask, what in the bloody hell is a "pocket" peanut butter and jam sandiwch?"

It's similar to a Pocket Monster (Pokemon), but with less grissle.

Re:As an aussie (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184173)

As an American, I don't know!

But the Appellate Court said it's too much like a ravioli, and therefore not patentable.

Some sane-ness in the world afterall!!

Re:As an aussie (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184176)

pocket bread? Beats the hell out of me, I'm aussie too :)

"Uncrustables" (3, Informative)

jangobongo (812593) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184182)

Smuckers has a picture of them here [smuckers.com] .

Apparently they are found in the frozen foods aisle of the grocery store as the the page says, "All you do is thaw and serve."

Re:"Uncrustables" (4, Interesting)

Caseyscrib (728790) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184276)

Those things aren't very healthy. They are high in sodium (260mg), as most prepackaged foods are. You're much better off making a PBJ from scratch. The regular jar of Smuckers Jelly [smuckers.com] has 0mg sodium in it.

And FYI, we should be getting about 500-2400mg of sodium a day, but the average American consumes something like 3000-6000mg per day, because we eat so much prepackaged food.

Re:As an aussie (1)

MillionthMonkey (240664) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184185)

I have to ask, what in the bloody hell is a "pocket" peanut butter and jam sandiwch?

Nonobvious, I guess.

Re:As an aussie (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184190)

If you had read the second paragraph of the article, you'd know. You didn't, so you don't.

Re:As an aussie (2, Informative)

NitsujTPU (19263) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184195)

Smuckers sells PB&J sandwiches that are little round circles. The circles look like they are made by a process involving 2 pieces of bread thusly, but I really don't know the process:

1) Take 2 slices of bread
2) Dollop PB&J in the center
3) Put a ring on top, and one on bottom, smash the rings together crushing the dough into a crimped solid bit of dough.


Heres a product link [smuckers.com]

Re:As an aussie (1)

orangepeel (114557) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184201)

Well, here's one way [target.com] to make them. Imagine two slices of bread with peanut butter and jelly (also known as jam) in between, then using something like what's featured at that link to press and heat the outer edges of the bread slices together -- sealing the filling inside.

I'm sure there are other ways of making pocket sandwiches (including ways that don't involve buying hardware), but they can't be all that different.

(Now watch as someone proves me wrong.)

Re:As an aussie (4, Funny)

kfg (145172) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184275)

(Now watch as someone proves me wrong.)

Yeah, they can be a PITA like that.

KFG

Re:As an aussie (1, Funny)

lightknight (213164) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184308)

It seems like a really stupid patent, until you try those sandwiches. They are GOOD. For someone who doesn't like to spend a lot of time cooking (or in the case of the PBJ, getting the components together), and also as a guy who never got over the whole crusts thing (hate them, cut them off, always), this thing is a godsend. Laugh all you like, but try one first.

Trouble (5, Funny)

soniCron88 (870042) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184138)

And you'd really get into trouble if you tried to make PB&J's with $2 bills...

Re:Trouble (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184221)

And you'd really get into trouble if you tried to make PB&J's with $2 bills...

Yeah because eating money isn't very nutritious.

Thank You! Thank You! (2, Funny)

orson_of_fort_worth (871181) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184140)

Once again the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has struck a blow for our rights online. We can email each other peanut butter and jelly sanwiches without fear of lawsuits.

Re:Thank You! Thank You! (3, Funny)

MillionthMonkey (240664) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184289)

Once again the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has struck a blow for our rights online. We can email each other peanut butter and jelly sanwiches without fear of lawsuits.

This just goes to show how liberal activist judges are legislating from the bench. How would a real judge- like Judge Scalia- [ucomics.com] handle this? He knows the Constitution is a "dead document", and would have invoked the original intent of the framers.

Peanut butter didn't even exist until 1890. The original framers of the Constitution lived in the 1790s and would have been completely befuddled by the creamy tasty goodness of a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. Ergo, it is nonobvious, patentable, and the court was unjustified in rejecting Smuckers' efforts to patent the device.

Ok, so what about (1)

peter1 (796360) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184150)

a patent on a PB&J with the crust? Has the Patent Office ruled on that, or is this my one chance to sue every person that eats a sandwitch with a crust?

Re:Ok, so what about (1)

MillionthMonkey (240664) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184407)

a patent on a PB&J with the crust? Has the Patent Office ruled on that, or is this my one chance to sue every person that eats a sandwitch with a crust?

No. Not people who eat a sandwich with a crust. But people who manufacture or consume ravioli would be in for a surprise.

Slow news day... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184152)

What's for lunch?

Re:Slow news day... (1)

kfg (145172) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184167)

" What's for lunch?"

Spam.

KFG

Re:Slow news day... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184397)

> What's for lunch?

KFG

Oh crap (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184156)

I guess my apple pie patent will be denied too.

PB&J vs. Technology (5, Insightful)

A Boy and His Blob (772370) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184158)

I don't see what the big interest with this case is. I think the only reason it is getting as much publicity as it is, is because the general public actually understands the patent. The prior art is clear: ravioli, pierogies, pirags, etc.

There are software patents being passed that are 100 times more ridiculous than this, yet you don't hear much about it outside of Slashdot or some short blurb in the tech section of the NYT.

Most of these software patents are just as absurd as patenting a method of making a PB&J sandwich, often worse. A "System and method for creating, processing and managing educational content within and between schools," [uspto.gov] I mean come on, or a "method and system for processing input from a command line interface." [uspto.gov]

I wish the general public would realize the ramifications of software patents like these. It is essentially re-patenting the wheel.

Re:PB&J vs. Technology (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184203)

The prior art is clear: ravioli, pierogies, pirags, etc.

uh.. this is /. how about HOT POCKETS ?!!?!?!

With a name like Smucker's (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184168)

...it has to be fraud.

Re:With a name like Smucker's (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184222)

Damnit, I'm out of mod points.

ob old commercial (5, Insightful)

daeley (126313) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184179)

With a name like Smucker's, it has to be, uh, patent pending.

Re:ob old commercial (5, Insightful)

John Seminal (698722) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184241)

With a name like Smucker's, it has to be, uh, patent pending.

ROFL. If I had mod points, I would mod that insightful. LOL.

Seriously, we need to do something about patent law. It is getting to be a joke. I remember when anyone could work on their car. I bet in 5-10 years there will be systems that GM and Ford and Toyota will patent so only they can fix it, and charge much more money. People joke about patents to blow jobs. Wait til you get a sunshine job, and the bill.

When did patent law become a way to make a monopoly?

Re:ob old commercial (4, Insightful)

soft_guy (534437) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184406)

When did patent law become a way to make a monopoly?

That was always the point. When you file a patent, you share your idea in exchange for a monopoly for a limited time. The problem is that the patent office is being bombarded by applications so they just figure "grant everything and let the courts sort it out". The problem with that is that it allows deep pocket companies to bully anyone they want by filing for ridiculous patents.

Smuckers Uncrustables (0, Redundant)

havaloc (50551) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184198)

For people who don't like crust. Smucker's Uncrustables [smuckers.com]

Re:Smuckers Uncrustables (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184273)

Maybe I'm missing the joke here, but THAT IS WHAT THIS WHOLE ARTICLE IS ABOUT. Sheesh. ;P

next thing you know (4, Funny)

b17bmbr (608864) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184204)

somebody will patent blow jobs, then my wife will have alegal excuse.

Re:next thing you know (1)

ShyGuy91284 (701108) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184400)

Wife? Egads, they do exist for the slashdot crowd....

The article, with my analysis... (4, Funny)

John Seminal (698722) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184210)

Smucker's 2-ounce peanut butter and jelly pockets come in two flavors -- strawberry and grape -- and are enclosed without a crust using a crimping method that the Orrville, Ohio, company says is one of a kind and should be protected from duplication by federal law.

One of a kind way to make PB&J sandwiches. I hate to tell these asshats, I was making PB and Strawberry sandwiches for ages. When I was younger I used to cut the edge of the bread off, but today I need the extra fiber.

Maybe I should patent that I whipe my ass with the paper going upwards and not downwards. Who knows, maybe I am the only one who knows how to whipe an ass.

Patent examiners at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office disagreed, saying the crimped edges are similar to making ravioli or a pie crust.

Fuck, here comes Chef Boy-R-D and his patent lawyers. Someone tell that 90 year old woman she is no longer lawfully allowed to make her family dinner.

Smucker asked Albie's Foods of Gaylord, Mich., to stop producing ready-made PB&J sandwiches for a school district, but the food manufacturer went to a federal judge in 2001 and then the patent office to invalidate Smucker's original patent. Albie's was "caught off guard, literally, because they didn't think you could patent a peanut butter and jelly sandwich," said the company's lawyer, Kevin Heinl.

Can my girlfriend patent the blow job? She is damn good. She swirls her tounge, head down, but the eyes looking up like a puppy dog. Like "oh dear daddy, I love you". Just like that. Nobody else does it like her. I'd like to get a nickle everytime your girlfriend gives you a blow job.

The patent office received 376,810 patent applications last year. It usually takes about two-and-a-half years for a patent to be processed. About 65 percent of all patents submitted are approved, Quinn said.

There were over 200,000 patents approved last year? Sweet Jesus. I really should get around to a but whipe patent.

"Very few patents are what one would call a 'pioneer patent,' meaning that the inventor discovered something very, very new that has never been discovered before," she said. "Most patents are given to changes to existing technology."

I'll dip the toilet paper in water. That's it.

"We bought a unique idea for making an everyday item more convenient (and) made a significant investment in the idea and in developing the innovative manufacturing technology that makes Uncrustables so easy to use," the company said.

I wonder how this ruling will effect the Pop Tart corporation?

Smucker's stock price fell 30 cents on Friday to close at $49.67 on the New York Stock Exchange.

I can hear Gordon Gekko yelling "Bud FOX, Damn you!". I wish we knew how this PB&J thing really played out.

Re:The article, with my analysis... (-1, Troll)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184298)

Braindead hippy gets modded up on Slashdot, news at 11.

Re:The article, with my analysis... (1)

John Seminal (698722) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184329)

Braindead hippy gets modded up on Slashdot, news at 11.

I only deal with the facts, sir.

This reminds me of two people I knew in highschool. One went to an Ivy League university and then to Yale Law School. The other went to community college, then the state U, then the U of Law School. The Yale lawyer could tell you the rights and responsibilities of a banana. The U of Lawyer was a pit bull. Plus, he could hold down his beer. Wanna guess who I would hire if I needed a laywer?

But you toast your friends with your hard apple cider. Non-alcoholic of course.

Re:The article, with my analysis... (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184376)

I was refering to the fact that you seem to think that because person A was making product X before person B invented process Z to make product X that for some reason process Z couldn't not be patented. Which is simply false.

Re:The article, with my analysis... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184313)

"Who knows, maybe I am the only one who knows how to whipe an ass."

You probably are, unless that's simply a misspelling.

But hey, keep posting. With enough practice you might actually graduate from high school one day.

Re:The article, with my analysis... (1)

John Seminal (698722) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184340)

You probably are, unless that's simply a misspelling. But hey, keep posting. With enough practice you might actually graduate from high school one day.

I hate the spelling Nazi's.

Re:The article, with my analysis... (4, Funny)

ConceptJunkie (24823) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184388)

You should probably also hate the improper-use-of-apostrophe Nazis too.

Re:The article, with my analysis... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184358)

"Can my girlfriend patent the blow job? She is damn good. She swirls her tounge, head down, but the eyes looking up like a puppy dog. Like "oh dear daddy, I love you". Just like that. Nobody else does it like her. I'd like to get a nickle everytime your girlfriend gives you a blow job."


If my wife gave me one like that, I'd be happy to pay you.

ooohhh... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184215)

Have you ever taken a shit, looked at it, and thought, "Woah, that was inside of me a minute ago!"

Re:ooohhh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184237)

No, but I have taken a shit, looked at it and thought, "Woah, that was once a Peanut Butter and Jelly sandwich!".

Re:ooohhh... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184256)

Your mom said that when I showed her my cock.

Re:ooohhh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184278)

My mom did, too.

Re:ooohhh... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184280)

The east hates the west. The Christians hate the Muslims. The liberals hate the conservatives. The Sunnis hate the Shiites. All across the globe, the chasm dividing humanity is ever deeper. In all the world's wars against terror, the distinction of who is perpetrating which depends on what side you ask -- so divided are we as a species that we can't even agree why we're killing each other.

For there to be peace, there must be understanding. For there to be understanding, there must be a common ground. But the further the chasm deepens, the more fundamental to basic human nature the common ground has to be.

And so April 15 is Poop For Peace Day.

Poop is the one experience all human beings have in common. We may have varying ideas of God and politics, but the power of an impending poop is a higher calling to which every human must answer. Side by side in a public bathroom, any two human beings are stripped of their differences and reduced to their most basic essence: a pair of feet sticking out below the stall, and a pair of butt trumpets performing a greasy symphony to lament humanity's non-negotiable deference to the call of the vile.

Under the influence of Taco Bell, there is no Christian or Muslim or Jew. There are only human bodies, reacting to the complications of digestion in the same predictable and malodorous ways. Poop wields supreme power over our bodies -- when poop calls, you answer, or you face the consequences. Poop is our cruel tyrant, our fickle deity, our omnipotent oppressor -- it is a force to which every human being has no choice but to submit.

And recognizing this is the first step toward world peace.

Poop For Peace Day is not a day of protest. Pooping for peace is not a left-wing or right-wing activity. Pooping for peace is an act of unity. It's not about religion or politics. Rather, it's about the simple truth: underlying our religions and our politics are universal needs, wants and desires. To poop for peace is to transcend arbitrary divisions and embrace that which makes us human. Only from starting at such a fundamental truism can we hope to expand our understandings and solve our differences.

On April 15, take some time to think when you take your time to stink. Think of yourself on your toilet, and George W. Bush on his, and Saddam and Osama on theirs. Think about the children of Iraq and the children of America, and realize that while their skins are different colors and their gods have different names, their daily ritual is exactly the same. We all poop, which means we're all human, which means we're all brothers and sisters. Any other differences are arbitrary -- we are all united in the daily struggle against the tyranny of the bowel.

Re:ooohhh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184323)

Most people breathe, walk, and pee pretty similarly, too.

Re:ooohhh... (1)

Pete LaGrange (696064) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184401)

And so April 15 is Poop For Peace Day.

What? Nobody out there has mod points AND a sense of humor? 'Cause this is the funniest friggin thing I've heard in a long time.

The patent office rejected a patent? (4, Insightful)

goon america (536413) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184229)

This is the real news here -- that the patent office rejected a patent application.

My question is this: if they accepted swinging on a swing [uspto.gov] as worthy of a US patent, why did the USPTO decide to deny Smuckers this one?

The patent WAS granted (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184287)

The US Court of Appeals invalidated the patent. The stupid motherfuckers at the patent office actually granted the thing.

It's starting to look like patents are drifting well past their original purpose. Overhaul the system, or ditch the suckers completely.

Re:The patent WAS granted (1)

SendBot (29932) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184393)

This is hilarious how it describes traditional swing operation as old an busted then implies that only this patent can boost humanity out of this tragedy.

"These methods of swinging on a swing, although of considerable interest to some people, can lose their appeal with age and experience. A new method of swinging on a swing would therefore represent an advance of great significance and value."

Still a neat idea I'd like to see in action.

Re:The patent office rejected a patent? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184377)

Thats the most ridiculous patent ever...We used to do that in public school at recess...prior art!

OMG! Signs of sanity... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184234)

Patent examiners at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office disagreed, saying the crimped edges are similar to making ravioli or a pie crust.

The patent office rejected a ridiculous patent! News at 11.

God damn geek anti-patent rants (0, Flamebait)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184268)

This pisses me off. All you geeks are ranting about how you basically shouldn't be able to patent anything. It doesn't matter what the product is that you're making, you should be able to patent a novel process. If I figure out a way to synthesize a new drug I should be able to patent that process. If I figure out a way to put together a toaster faster than my competitor then I should be able to patent that process. No-one is trying to patent peanut butter (paste) and jelly (jam) sandwiches, Smuckers is trying to defend their patent on a particular process they use to make a product that just happens to include these ingredients. You're free to clone their product and compete with them, you just have to come up with your own process to do it. Without this protection any innovation Smuckers puts into improving their process can be just copied by competitors. That means Smuckers cant put any significant amount of investment into refining their process or they'll be undercut by competitors that copy it without cost. That's the justification for patents and without it we wouldn't have all the innovative technology we use every day. Unlike copyright, patents are not about incentives, they're about outright survival in a competitive market place.

Re:God damn geek anti-patent rants (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184398)

Well, the real problem here is that nobody on slashdot actually understands the patent system, how patents work, how they are rejected, how they are granted, etc. All they know is a vague idea that there is some kind of requirement for "obviousness" and "novelty" without actually understanding what those terms mean and how they are applied. They don't understand the concept of the sections of a patent and don't know how to analyze one (much less read one which really isn't that difficult). Most of the "analysis" done is based on the title or abstract which are more often than not a vague description of what the patent actually covers.

Patent law is founded on hundreds of years of court decisions which have sculpted the legal requirements for rejecting patents. Rather than put any faith in that everyone here seems to be under the impression that the laws can be completely thrown out and ignored at will.

The old adage is correct, they fear what they don't understand.

Abstract: Patent Number: 6,874,409 (4, Informative)

UpLateDrinkingCoffee (605179) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184274)

Sounds like the innovation is a second layer of peanut butter to encase the jam and also the crimping. Here, you be the judge: Abstract

A method of making a crustless sandwich from two slices of bread with outer crusts, the method comprising: placing a first slice of bread on a platen; forming a mass of a first food spread onto the central portion of the first slice of bread in a position spaced inwardly from a marginal area where the mass is formed with an inner lower layer with an outer rim extending upwardly from the lower layer to define a closed pocket or receptacle recess in the mass; placing a second food spread in the receptacle recess; closing the receptacle recess with a layer of the first food spread generally coextensive with the mass and supported on the outer rim of the mass to encapsulate the second food spread into a center composite food layer; placing a second slice of bread over the first slice to cover the center composite food layer; cutting the bread slices in unison in a cut pattern to remove the crusts of the slices; and, pressing the two bread slices together by force through the slices against a pressure surface on the platen to crimp the slices into a crustless sandwich.

Bad tast! (1)

SWTP_OS9 (658064) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184288)

As long as it NOT with their version of the PB & J! Its horrible!

Average Patent Office Worker (4, Insightful)

SteelV (839704) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184293)

Patent comes in for a new type of PB&J.

Worker: Hey! I could have thought of that... hell, the wife makes one every Tuesday... DENIED.

Patent comes in for a new "technology." A Web site will have a box labeled Username and one labeled Password, and a Submit button that logs on the user to the Web sites system.

Worker: That sounds complex about computer web site things. Must be some new technology. APPROVED.

Re:Average Patent Office Worker (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184326)

Actually the patents are broken down into groups based on technology (chemical, electrical, mechanical, etc..) and then further broken down into subgroups of those. Examiners who would be working on food (PB&J) would never get patents for computers (username/password).

Although, I doubt mundane facts like that will stop you from ranting about that which you know little to nothing about.

Smuckers... (1)

erroneus (253617) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184296)

What in the hell are they doing trying to patent crimped bread?!

There are so few things about food and cooking that hasn't been done before that I'm willing to believe it has pretty much ALL been done before. This is pretty ridiculous.

On the other hand, they might be making peanutbutter and jelly sandwiches on crimped bread, I'm making jelly and peanutbutter sandwiches on TOAST! Now *that* has to be patentable because I've never heard of it before and it's nothing like a pie crust or ravioli. (Though my secret ingredient might get me into hot water with DuPont... I'm still in negotiations)

Re:Smuckers... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184383)

On the other hand, they might be making peanutbutter and jelly sandwiches on crimped bread, I'm making jelly and peanutbutter sandwiches on TOAST! Now *that* has to be patentable because I've never heard of it before and it's nothing like a pie crust or ravioli.

actually, pb&j on toast is my favorite way to eat it... my whole family's, for as long as i've been around, and my mother's, my grandmother's (although she mixes in a little miracle whip with the pb... ewwww!), even my great grammie's (and she was a little kid when peanut butter was invented)...

my little nephew (he's like 2) wants his pb&j "cooked".... he won't eat it any other way...

this is so five hours ago (1)

atlaz (31278) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184328)

but don't worry, because hip subscribers get to see the next slashdot story early!

http://www.boingboing.net/2005/04/08/court_denie s_ smucker.html

and they had a picture.

why doesn't slashdot have pictures?

they too good for pictures?

Whatever happened to innovation on slashdot?

Is no one's patent safe? (1)

beemac (413081) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184368)

My single-click peanut butter sandwich patent has yet to be struck down.

Wow (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184379)

I was silent when Microsoft patent XML doc format, but this is something else.

What eva you do... (1)

gov_coder (602374) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184395)

Don't be going to Smuckers online contact form [feedbackasp.com] trying to sell them on new ideas to patent.

Just because two guys sold them patents to PB&Js doesn't mean they are stupid.

And especially don't try and sell them a patent on milk in a cylindrical container. I'm already negotiating that one with them now.

I just don't get it... (1)

flawedgeek (833708) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184396)

Why the hell is someone too lazy to make their own PB&J gonna get up, drive to the grocery store and buy these processed, prepackaged pieces of crap? Oh, wait. That's what mothers are for.

I can see it now.. (1)

Derwood5555 (828126) | more than 9 years ago | (#12184402)

Make a PB&J..
Go to jail...
Its the law...

What has our society come to... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12184409)

How lazy are we as a society, when we can't even spend 1 minute to make a peanut butter and jelly sandwich? Thats what scares me more then this Smuckers patent.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?