Those of you who are familiar with patent law may think you recognize this invention.Virtually everyone who is a wacky patent fan has probably seen the Human slingshot machine, which is US Patent No. 5,421,783, which issued on June 6, 1995.This invention is certainly similar, but this is an improved human slingshot machine.It would seem that previous attempts at such slingshot machines have deficiencies. Imagine that!
One of the deficiencies in the prior art is that previously existing human slingshot machines have a tendency for the rubber strands to deteriorate, which I think we can all agree is certainly not a good thing.So perhaps this is a substantial improvement in human projectile innovation!
One thing that did particularly catch my attention is that the patent itself explains: “The invention relates to an amusement device . . . used to successively propel and retard a rider to cause the rider to undergo a vertically oscillatory motion.”Propel and retard a rider?Perhaps the propel part is fun and amusing, but the retard part sounds both destructive and prophetic, not to mention just a tad bit politically incorrect. Perhaps the phrase “retard the rider” was choosen on purpose as being descriptive, but an interesting and questionable choice nonetheless.
Patent applications can and do certainly say rather bizarre things.
B.S. in Electrical Engineering, Rutgers University
J.D., Franklin Pierce Law Center
L.L.M. in Intellectual Property, Franklin Pierce Law Center Send me an e-mail
Gene is a US Patent Attorney, Law Professor and the founder of IPWatchdog.com. He teaches patent bar review courses and is a member of the Board of Directors of the United Inventors Association. Gene has been quoted in the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, the LA Times, CNN Money and various other newspapers and magazines worldwide
Gene Quinn is a patent attorney and a leading commentator on patent law and innovation policy. Mr. Quinn has twice been named one of the top 50 most influential people [...see more]
Warning & Disclaimer: The pages, articles and comments on IPWatchdog.com do not constitute legal advice, nor do they create any attorney-client relationship. The articles published express the personal opinion and views of the author as of the time of publication and should not be attributed to the author’s employer, clients or the sponsors of IPWatchdog.com. Read more.