The Inventors' Who Aren't Inventors'!

 

The moment a common name starts appearing in several different inventions associated with distinct subjects/domain/expertise (exclude computer science); one should conclude that he/she is the mere Investor/Owner/Assignee. The real Inventors’ are different, bounded by the Non-Disclosure/Employer-Employee Contract/Assignment; & that Investor/Owner just added their own names without adding any Inventive or Novel theory into that Invention. This has been happening for Decades. And according to me, this practice of adding names to Patents in the inventions wherein those who’ve neither contributed theoretically nor technically anything; should be stopped, everywhere. How this could be achieved?

Every Invention should be asked to disclose segregated features & the specific contributions of the individual inventor. This would partially disclose the Investor’s/Owner’s own Input.

This has become a practice that Millionaires/Billionaires would start calling themselves as Inventors’ (despite they being mere Innovators’ / Investors’ / Owners’ / Assignees’) of the products they sold/sell by using powerful PRs, funding hungry media, and their Ideological Followers; to amplify the same. An Investor/Owner can be a Joint Applicant or an Assignee or Employer or Owner of that invention; But, if in case there’s name of that individual in the Invention; then the bifurcated Invention presented in Application should clearly specify the part that person invented/contributed. So should all Inventors’ via Self-Affidavits. This won’t resolve the issue wholly, but at least, partially.

© Pranav Chaturvedi