Some WIBNI are purely works of fancy with no basis in reality. However other ideas are 90% doable and only require one or two technological hurdles to be overcome before they can be completely enabled. For example sometimes the discovery of a way to manufacture a new type of material with particular electrical, mechanical and chemical properties would enable several new technologies not imagined by the inventors of the new material but which were previously imagined by other inventors who lacked the knowledge of how to fabricate the new material.
What I propose is to enable WIBNI ideas by figuring out exactly what technological problem need to be solved to enable the WIBNI idea and then program a searching algorithim to track various sources such as newly published patents, technical journals (Physical Review Letters, etc.) and any any other relevant source material. As soon as the technological problem is solved then the inventor would be automatically informed that their WIBNI idea is no longer just a flight of fancy.
Alternatively the inventor could write a patent application explaining how every detail of the WIBNI invention works except the one feature which makes it undoable. As soon as the searching algorithm finds that someone has figured out how to perform this particular feature then this information could be automatically inserted into the WIBNI patent application and thus turn it into an enabled patent application. The application could then be automatically submitted to the patent office.
(Thanks to Willis7's "Patent Monster" for partial inspiration for this idea)-- blaise, Oct 20 2002 Hehe.-- bristolz, Oct 20 2002 This would definitely help ideas that could be wondrously helpful but are wondrously infeasible into a possible idea. Yet this idea in itself is a WINBI.-- Ruuffus, Oct 20 2002 What blaise proposes is doable, and doesn’t appear to be that particularly difficult to implement, as it is perfectly possible to get a paper patent that does nothing more than combine the teachings of other patents in a nonobvious manner. Wouldn’t it be even nicer if (WIBENI) somebody would come up with an equally efficacious method of marketing these paper patents once they’ve issued, i.e., optimizing the appropriate prototype manufactures and marketing agents, automatically writing up winning proposals, writing license agreements, meeting people in bars by accident, etc. All of those things that are chancy and that inventors are no good at doing.-- ldischler, Oct 20 2002 I'm here to help you with your annotation, [UnaBubba]. What is it you were trying to say?-- bristolz, Oct 20 2002 "If, he thought to himself, such a machine is a virtual impossibility, then it must logically be a finite improbability. So all I have to do in order to make one is to work out exactly how improbable it is, feed that figure into the finite improbability generator, give it a fresh cup of really hot tea ... "-- General Washington, Oct 20 2002 Yeah, the word "efficacious" probably wore you all out.-- bristolz, Oct 20 2002 // As soon as the searching algorithm find that someone has figured out how to perform this particular feature then this information could be automatically inserted into the WIBNI patent application and thus turn it into an enabled patent application. //
...giving credit and ownership of the idea to the person who figured out how to perform the previously impossible, of course.-- waugsqueke, Oct 20 2002 The particular source material that enables the previosly WIBNI idea would have to be included in an IDS (Information Disclosure Statement) submitted with the patent application. Under current US law any pertinent information known to the inventor directly effecting the patentability of a patent application must be submitted by the inventor in an IDS. Otherwise the patent can be invalidated in court. Also the inventor opens themself up to a rejection under title 35 section 112 of the US code if any portion of the claimed invention is not enabled. Therefore it is in the inventor's best interest to provide the patent office with the document which enables the invention. However if the invention is nonobvious in view of the enabling document then the inventors of the enabling document would not be entitled to any ownership of a patent granted on the enabled invention.-- blaise, Oct 21 2002 // if someone cleverer than you magically appeared //
Hmmm. <Rubs dirty old oil lamp, waits for [UnaBubba] to pop out in cloud of smoke>-- 8th of 7, Oct 21 2002 [UB] - sorry, you're asking an American to understand that there's a world outside of the US? Maybe 8ths annotation really is true.-- PeterSilly, Oct 21 2002 I apologize for neglecting non-U.S. regulations but I believe that most non-U.S. patent offices have analagous laws regarding this point. Basically my point was that patent rights are typically not shared with parties of interest not included in the original patent application (i.e. the inventors and the assigned owner of the patent application).-- blaise, Oct 21 2002 Do they even have patent laws outside of the USA?-- bristolz, Oct 21 2002 Dyson v. Amway.-- egbert, Oct 22 2002 Hey! It's not about extorting money from gullible people.
This idea is about looking into the WIBNI and finding the parts that are feasible, interesting, and novel.-- pashute, May 21 2023 random, halfbakery