Patent reveals nextgen Google

. . . log processing system may track actions performed by each particular client with respect to that client's history of accessing various web sites. In this case, the web site mapping storage may rank the web pages within a web site based on the particular client's user history and the web site mapping information may be different for each particular client . . .

What? The foregoing is an excerpt from Google's newly published patent application covering its site links technology. Filed June 20, 2005 and published December 21, 2006, Google's US Patent Application No. 20060287985 covers Google's method of providing you multiple search results from a single website. You know sometimes when you do a Google search and get some indented results from the same web address listed directly below a search result? That is a site link, a link to another page from the same website that may be relevant to your search query. The newly published patent application covers Google's method of collecting and displaying site link search results along with their regular search results.

Why should you care? You have been seeing the indented site search results on Google for months. Well, the above language taken from the patent application suggests Google is working toward a something much more interesting - custom search results. The above patent application language indicates Google may be on the cusp of customizing its search engine results for each user. When I search for cookies, the nextgen search will give me results relating to a small text file located on my hard drive. When my mom searches for cookies on the nextgen system, she will get results for different chocolate chip cookie recipes.

The system will examine your previous searches, determine the results you clicked on, and "learn" what you are really trying to find. Sure, the generic Google will always be available for new users and the aluminum foil hat crowd, but the nextgen Google promises to cut a lot of the fat out of your search results.

Brett Trout

Google patent searches

Big brother in an Iowa town

Northwestern College in Orange City Iowa is now using patented technology to track down students illegally downloading copyrighted music from the internet. Information technology specialists at Northwestern have implemented eTelemetry’s Locate software product. Locate analyzes network packets to associate online activities with individual users in real time, and archives that information over time.

eTelemetry just received a patent (U.S. patent No. 7,133,916) on the Locate technology last month. The company also offers a product called Metron which tracks employee bandwidth usage, enabling companies to track how long employees surf the Internet or instant message their friends and family.

Before implementing any employee monitoring systems, companies should contact a business lawyer and employment lawyer to implement such systems in a way that avoids additional liability for the company.

Brett Trout

etelemetry northwestern iowa downloading

Iowa law professor wins Blawggie Award

Congratulations to Professor Tung Yin of my alma mater, The University of Iowa College of Law. Professor Yin’s blog, The Yin Blog, just won the Blawggie Award for Best Law Professor Blog. To read more about the Blawggies as well as winners in other categories, check out Dennis Kennedy’s blog.

Brett Trout

Tung Yin Dennis Kennedy Blawggie Award

Iowa State University earns millions in profits from patents

What has your alma mater been up to? Well, if you went to Iowa State University, your alma mater would be up to its armpits in patent royalties. According to Des Moines register business editor David Elbert, Iowa State University receives millions of dollars in royalties every year from its 355 active patents.

The Iowa State University Research Foundation (ISURF) is the entity which controls Iowa State University patents. Every year ISURF applies for about fifty patents and receives between $2-10 million in patent royalties. Expenses come off the top, with the remainder of the royalty profits being divided equally between the inventor, the inventor’s Iowa State University Department and ISURF.

Brett Trout

iowa state university
isurf patent iowa iowa state research foundation

Des Moines Register Recognizes Top Bloggers

Wow. Check out the top story today in the Business Section of the Des Moines Register. The topic is how Des Moines area blogs are promoting companies in the eyes of their clients. Not surprisingly, two of the top Iowa bloggers mentioned, business lawyer Rush Nigut and blogging coach Mike Sansone, are good friends of mine.

In less than one year, Rush’s blog has made him the primary presence on Google for anyone searching for a business lawyer in Iowa. By combining online freebies, such as information on small business formation packages and human resource audits with entertaining articles on the latest business issues, Rush’s readership has gone through the roof and continues to grow.

Thanks in no small part to these two Des Moines business pioneers; this humble patent attorney also received a mention in the Des Moines Register article for being voted the sixth Best Law Blog in the World. Congratulations to Rush and Mike and thanks for all of your help. I could not have done it without you!

Brett Trout


Des Moines
Iowa
Rush Nigut
bloggers
Mike Sansone
Rush on Business

Microsoft attempts to patent RSS feed technology

Although Peter Merholz may have coined the term “blog”, Dave Winer is the true godfather of blogging. Winer not only invented the distinctive reverse chronological architecture of today’s blogs, but also invented Really Simple Syndication (RSS) which broadcasts blogs to readers. Like most great discoveries, the creation of the blog was more accidental than intentional. Looking for a way to organize a very large collaborative project, Winer hit upon the frequently updated chronological website structure.

Noting how well his new baby worked on one project, Winer expanded the architecture to assist him in delivering his digital newsletter to readers. When spam crippled his ability to distribute his newsletter via email, Winer came up with the idea of a syndication system that would allow readers to request newsletters. Today, Winer's RSS delivers billions of blog posts to voracious readers all over the world.

Mr. Winer is upset, however, over recent news that Microsoft is apparently trying to bottle and sell his free RSS elixir via the monopoly afforded under by the patent system. Yesterday the United States Patent and Trademark Office published two Microsoft patent applications covering aspects of RSS feeds. The first patent application covers "Finding and consuming web subscriptions in a web browser." The second patent application covers a "Content syndication platform used with RSS feeds."

Microsoft apparently plans to bundle the, still as yet patent pending, technology into an upcoming version of Internet Explorer. Calling such an move to monopolize feed readers for RSS technology an atrocity, Winer calls upon "everyone who has contributed anything to the success of RSS" to denounce any attempt by Microsoft to charge consumers for RSS.

Brett Trout

microsoft patent rss winer

Happy Holidays - You Dirty Infringers

Entities like Microsoft, Sony and the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) are trying harder and harder to thwart copyright infringers. Unfortunately, as you can see from the foregoing links, while those efforts may tend to capture a small-time infringer or two, the anti-infringing efforts tend to make life much more difficult for the rest of us. Ironically, from what I can see, the anti-copyright initiatives do very little to thwart the technically savvy who, not surprisingly, tend to engage in much more copyright infringement than the average hip-hop downloading granny.

I realize that granting me the fully paid up, perpetual, royalty-free, world-wide license like I get with CDs and DVDs is no longer in vogue. I am all for a little capitalism, but I must appear absolutely covered with fleece. I also had not realized that it must be considered poor etiquette in certain media licensing circles to leave me the least bit bewhiskered. Shearing consumers bald, however, cannot be successful in the long run. While consumers are willing to pay a fair price for entertainment, integrating enjoyment limitations into media and placing monitoring software on customer’s computers will ultimately backfire.

In fact, it already has. I spoke with Santa; he has had enough. Don't tell my kids, but I have it on good authority that come December 25th Santa will be sliding down the chimney with our family's first ever Mac.


Brett Trout

microsoft apple copyright infringement

Blawg IT Voted Sixth Best Law Blog in the World!

Thanks to ALL of my readers for voting Blawg IT the sixth best law blog in the world! Congratulations to The Volokh Conspiracy for winning the competition.

Although I want to thank everyone who voted, I would especially like to thank the following people who went above and beyond the call of duty in corralling votes:


Rush Nigut of Rush On Business
Christine Branstad
Martha Boesen
Sandy Renshaw of Purple Wren
Matt Krigbaum of Moyer and Bergman
Josh Sorrell of EGA Architects
Professor Tung Yin of The Yin Blog
Mike Sansone of Converstations
Abra Pulley of Pulley Chiropractic
Nate Olson
Randy Norian
Kyle Torke
Jeff Yokiel
Craig Drotzmann
Jennifer Trout
Jack Fitzsimmons
Pat and Susan Trout
Lindy Fitzsimmons

Thank you to everyone who voted; see you next year!

Brett Trout

weblog awards, blawg it

Could a Google Patent Search Invalidate Your Patent?

Careful what you plug into the Google Patent Search Engine. Although Google’s privacy policy protects your personally identifiable information, it says nothing about maintaining the confidentiality of what you search. In the past, Google has refused to turn over search term records, but there is nothing to prevent such a turnover in the future.

Other search engines have made search string information publicly available. Similarly, there is no reason Google could not expand tools like Google Trends or Google Zeitgeist to provide the public with details about your patent search string and, in turn, your invention. A larger, more immediate problem is how a judge might rule as to whether a Google Patent Search constitutes a patent invalidating disclosure under 35 USC Section 102.

A court is not likely to rule that a simple search that never left Google constitutes an enabling disclosure sufficient to trigger 35 USC Section 102 invalidity. A court might have a different opinion, however, if you are deposed on the matter. Admitting that you conducted a patent search on Google, but have no record of what terms you plugged into Google or whether Google kept that information confidential, might make for a rather uncomfortable day in court.

Worse, in the event Google does make Google Patent Search information public between the time you conduct your search and file your patent application, you could have significant problems with the validity of your patent both in the United States and overseas.

Brett Trout

Google patent google patent invalidity

Last Day to Vote For Weblog Awards

Don’t forget to Vote. Today is the last day of voting for the Weblog Awards. Clicking on the above icon will take you directly to the poll. Just click “Blawg IT”, click “Vote” and you are done. Thanks to everyone who has voted so far.

Brett Trout

weblog awards, blawg it

Microsoft Pay-for-Post

The Federal Trade Commission has issued a staff opinion stating that word of mouth marketing, like blogs, are deceptive if potential consumers are more likely to trust the endorser of a product or service based on an assumption that the endorser is independent from the marketer. This opinion hits secretly-sponsored blogs right between the eyes. If a company is sponsoring you to speak highly of them, you better make your audience aware of the sponsorship. That warning also extends to marketing firms seeking to influence bloggers on behalf of their clients

I write about issues that affect my readers. People read my words. People like my words. It is all about the words. If my words told you that I was the best patent lawyer in the world, or that I offered special holiday discounts on my services, or that I offer a money-back guarantee (none of which are true), what would you think of my words? You would question their integrity and probably not read them anymore.

Blogs which merely push a product or service never gain long term traction. Great blogs offer insight, information and entertainment. Readers know great blogs. Great bloggers are: transparent; responsive to their readership; and personal. These traits engender trust and, at times, personal and professional relationships follow.

People trust blogs; they do not trust marketers. Marketers know that the secret of success on the blogosphere is sincerity. Once you can fake that, you have it made . . . or so they thought. The blogosphere police are powerful. Blog readers are comprehensive. Large companies like Wal-Mart and Sony learned to their chagrin that a forceful “outing” of your secretly sponsored blog is unpleasant. Such outings destroy years of hard-earned brand value. Such lost value dwarfs any slight benefit a fake blog could hope to garner.

If marketers cannot write their own fake blogs, what can they do? The next obvious step is to sway existing blogs with a solid readership and a reputation for integrity. As I have written about the current Iowa Microsoft antitrust case, I have received an increasing flow of information. Some pro-Microsoft, some anti-Microsoft. What I noticed was an insidious flow of pro-Microsoft propaganda not identified as being sponsored by Microsoft. Although the information started off neutral, the tone changed toward an obvious bias. That led me to check out the sender. Once I identified that the information was sponsored by Microsoft, that knowledge irreparable impaired the credibility of the information and the sender. I erred in my initial failure to make the connection, but as noted in the FTC opinion, I trusted the endorser more because I assumed the endorser was independent of Microsoft.

Tiny companies with tiny problems may get away with planting blog posts no one will ever read. For big dogs, like Microsoft, attempts to surreptitiously manipulate the blogosphere on larger issues will inevitably back-fire. Keep that play for the mainstream media.

I like Microsoft. I use their products at home and at the office. This blog would be less of a blog without Microsoft clip art. While I do not like some things about their products, they are better than anything else I have found. I am a customer by virtue of the strength of their products; I just hope they do not lose me through the furtive nature of their marketing.

Brett Trout

Microsoft, Iowa, FTC, antitrust, pay for post

Google Patent Search

Kevin O’Keefe gave me the heads up on Google launching its beta Google Patent Search engine. A quick search for Brett Trout reveals 103 patents, including my personal patent on a Key Actuated Locking Cap. Whether it is a patent on a stick or a strangely salacious description of a well head you will find it here in all of its glorious searchability.

Google Patent Search is a boon to independent inventors. Searching patents at the United States Patent Office website can by cumbersome, slow and difficult to search. The Google Patent Search engine eliminates most of these problems. A quick search may save you thousands of dollars trying to patent something that has already been patented. Even if you do not find your invention in the database, the mere act of searching will likely uncover devices you can use to improve your own invention.

Careful though, the site can become quite addictive.

Brett Trout

google google patent search patent invention free patent search

Online Legal Ethics - National CLE

Strafford legal teleconference presentations is offering a national CLE teleconference Thursday, December 14, 2006 from noon to approximately 1:30pm CST. The conference is entitled Ethical Risks of Law Firm Websites and Blogs: Staying on the Right Side of the Ethics Line. The panel of speakers includes:

Benjamin Cowgill, Counselor and Attorney at Law, Lexington, Kentucky, focuses his career in the field of legal ethics. He is the former Chief Bar Counsel for the Kentucky Bar Association and a well-known presenter of CLE programs on various aspects of law office technology, including ethical considerations. Mr. Cowgill can be reached via email at ben@cowgill.com.

John Steele, Ethics and Conflicts Director and Special Counsel, Fish & Richardson P.C., Silicon Valley, is responsible for resolving firm wide issues related to conflicts of interest and ethics particular to IP practice. He regularly lectures on legal ethics at law schools throughout California. Mr. Steele can be reached via email at jsteele@fr.com.

Brett J. Trout, Law Offices of Brett J. Trout, P.C., Des Moines, Iowa, represents clients in patent, trademark information technology issues. He is the former president of the Iowa Intellectual Property Association and author of the book, Internet Laws Affecting Your Company. Mr. Trout can be reached via email at trout@bretttrout.com.

Brett Trout

Other Related Topics:
Blawg, Blog Ethics, Cowgill, Legal Ethics, Blog CLE

Chicago Gunman's toilet patented in 2001

Friday, gunman Joe Jackson entered the law offices of Wood Phillips in Chicago and killed three people, including two patent attorneys. According to a letter Jackson wrote in February of 2003, Jackson felt patent attorney Michael McKenna subsequently stole Jackson’s idea for a portable toilet after Jackson described the invention to McKenna in 2002.

The only problem is that Leslie Cosby, the inventor of United States Letters Patent Number 6,240,576 for a portable toilet, filed the patent application in April of 1998. The patent actually issued in June of 2001, at least six months prior to the initial meeting described in Jackson’s letter.

McKenna’s family issued a statement that Jackson had paid McKenna $825 to conduct a patent search for his proposed invention. According to the family, the search uncovered that Jackson’s toilet had already been patented. McKenna’s family went on to state that the state investigated Jackson’s complaints about McKenna, but found no wrongdoing.


Brett Trout

Other Related Topics:
patent, Chicago, patent attorney, Joe Jackson, Michael McKenna

Two Patent Attorneys Killed in Chicago Shooting

Last Friday truck driver Joe Jackson killed two patent attorneys and a mail clerk at the Chicago law offices of Wood, Phillips, Katz, Clark & Mortimer. Wood Phillips immediately issued a press release lamenting the senseless and regretable nature of the incident. One of the dead was patent attorney Michael McKenna. Jackson was reportedly upset over what he felt was a patent attorney using Jackson's money to patent Jackson's device for a third party. McKenna had reportedly researched the truck toilet for Jackson and informed Jackson the toilet had already been patented.

After being hung up on and turned away from the building, Jackson returned to McKenna’s law office with a gun, a knife and a hammer. Jackson forced a security guard at gunpoint to take Jackson to the 38th floor offices of Wood Phillips. While not a member of the firm, McKenna rented office space from Wood Phillips. Upon reaching the offices, Jackson chained the doors and proceeded to shoot and kill McKenna, Allen Hoover, managing partner of the Wood law firm, and Paul Goodson, a mail sorter at the firm. Jackson also shot paralegal Ruth Zak Leib in the foot. After the fourth shooting Jackson took a hostage. Two SWAT officers then shot and killed Jackson. The hostage was not harmed.

Reportedly Jackson discussed the truck toilet design with his pastor, Reverend C.L. Sparks, who recommended they visit McKenna to see about protecting the design. Sparks stated Jackson gave McKenna $25,000 over several years, which included a $5,000 retainer to patent his idea. McKeena later informed Jackson that the idea had already been patented. According to Sparks, Jackson felt McKenna had used the money to patent the idea for someone else.

Our prayers go out to the families of all the victims.


Brett Trout

Other Related Topics:
patent, Chicago, patent attorney, Joe Jackson, MichaelMcKenna

Is it in the Public Domain?

English rockers who have apparently not died before they got old are up in arms over the British government’s refusal this week to extend British copyright protection beyond the current 50 year term. Unlike the United States government, which never met a copyright extension act it did not like, the British government feels a 50 year limit, the same as most European countries, is necessary to allow its citizens some public domain benefit before the next Ice Age.

Even with Congress constantly passing laws extending the term of copyright protection, copyrightable material can still enter the public domain in many ways. Lack of proper copyright notice, failure to renew the copyright registration, failure to properly manufacture the work, recording the an audio work prior to U.S. protection, and authorship by a citizen of a country with which the United States does not have a copyright treaty are all ways in which a copyrightable work can enter the public domain.

Probably the only bright line test to determine if a work is in the public domain is if the work was published prior to 1923. While it is possible to check the Copyright Office to confirm a copyright is registered, the absence of registration does not mean the work is in the public domain. Reliance on the absence of a copyright notice, Internet urban legends, or an analysis from Herb in accounting can get you in trouble.

If you know the date the work was created and the date it was published, you can use this handy chart to determine if the work is in the public domain:

I. Is it a published work? (If so, Go to II)
A. Is the work anonymous, pseudonymous or a work for hire? (If so, Go to IB)
1. Unpublished works of Authors:
a) Work is public domain 70 years from last author’s death
b) Work is public domain 70 years after last author’s death
c) If author’s death unknown (assuming you get certified unknown death report from the Copyright Office)
(1) Work is public domain 120 years from creation
B. Unpublished anonymous works, pseudonymous works or works for hire:
1. Work is public domain 120 years after its creation

II. Was it published the same year it was created? (If so, Go to III)
A. Created before 1978 and published before 1978? (If so, Go to III)
B. Created after 1978 and published after 1978? (If so, Go to III)
C. Created before 1978 and published 1977-2002? (If not, skip to IID)
1. Work is public domain the later of
a) 70 years from last author’s death
b) 12/31/2047
D. Created before 1978 and published after 2002? (If not, skip to IIE)
1. Work is public domain 70 years from last author’s death
E. Created before 1978 and published after 2002?
1. Work is public domain 70 years from last author’s death

III. When was the work first published?
A. Before 1909
1. Work is public domain
B. 1923-1963
1. Was it published with proper copyright notice? (If so, Go to IIIB2)
a) If not, work is public domain
2. Was copyright renewed? (If so, Go to IIIB3)
a) If not, work is public domain
3. Published with proper copyright notice and copyright renewed
a) Work is public domain 95 years after publication
C. 1963-1978
1. Was it published with proper copyright notice? (If so, Go to IIIC2)
a) If not, work is public domain
2. Published with proper copyright notice
a) Work is public domain 95 years after publication
D. 1978-March 1, 1989
1. Was it published with proper copyright notice? (If so, Go to IIID3)
a) If not, Go to IIID2
2. Was the copyright subsequently registered? (If so, Go to IIID3)
a) If published without proper notice and no subsequent copyright registration, work is public domain
3. Work is public domain 70 years after the death of author, or if work of corporate authorship, the shorter of 95 years from publication, or 120 years from creation
E. After March 1, 1989
1. Work is public domain 70 years after the death of author, or if work of corporate authorship, the shorter of 95 years from publication, or 120 years from creation


Brett Trout

Other Related Topics:
Copyright, Public Domain, European Copyright, English Copyright, UK Music

Internet Laws and Your Business

Millions of companies do business on the Internet. Of those millions, what percentage has a complete understanding of their online legal liabilities? 30% 20% 2%? Actually, most LAWYERS do not have a thorough understanding of their clients’ online legal liabilities. You end up with a client afraid to ask and a lawyer afraid to tell. They both play dumb, ignoring the elephant in the room. The problem is that the client is standing at the rear of the elephant. And instead of guiding the elephant away from the giant tub of bran muffins and out the door, the lawyer is donning the Haz-Mat suit and polishing his/her $300/hr gold-plated shovel.

No attorney knows everything about Internet law. The best you can hope for is a business lawyer or an intellectual property lawyer who knows enough about the law of e-commerce to make educated guesses. Would it be best to slip you out the back, force the elephant out the front, or aim him toward your competitor? You need knowledge and experience to make that decision.

The Internet opens new doors, gives people the chance to try things lawmakers never anticipated. Pretty soon you have new activities conflicting with old laws. Before you can get new, better laws, however, you have to wait for someone to get mad enough to sue and for a judge to enforce the old law on the new activity. Given the unfairness of the result, the case is appealed and the courts “reinterpret” the old law to address the new activity. It is typically not until this point when lawmakers begin the multi-year process of making new laws tailored the new activity.

Unfortunately, by the time they actually create “new” law, the Internet has opened more opportunities, and we return to square one. What you need is an attorney who not only has a firm understanding of the law as it presently exists, but who has followed the foregoing process so many times that the attorney has some insight. The best attorneys, the ones who really know the law related to the Internet, will not hesitate to change their advice as legal developments foreshadow emerging opportunities.

Constantly adjusting, rather than burying your head in the sand or merely crossing your fingers is the key to navigating the Laws of the Internet. What can you do to help your business lawyer help you through the maze of online legal issues? Spot issues before they become problems. A handy desk reference like the book Internet Laws Affecting Your Company is no substitute for legal advice. It may, however, give you enough information to know when an early conversation with your attorney, may stave off later costly litigation.


Brett Trout

Other Related Topics:
Internet Laws Affecting Your Company, Internet Law

Let the Voting Begin

Voting for the Weblog Awards begins today and will end December 15. You can vote once per day, per computer. To vote for this blog, click the above banner, check "Blawg IT" on the ballot and click "Vote".

If you know of anyone else who might like to see a little blog from Iowa (possibly the only one in any category), beat out nine other Goliaths for the title, please pass this along.

While you are there, check out the other categories for some fantastic blogs that also made the finals. One particular blog of note, in the Best Technology Blog category, is Dave Taylor's comprehensive blog Ask Dave Taylor. The depth and breadth of tech questions Dave answers on his blog has to be seen to be believed. To vote for Dave, click here.


Thanks for your vote!

Brett Trout

Other Related Topics:
Weblog Awards, Weblog Award Finalist, Blawg IT

You like me, you really like me

Check out the new sidebar bling. Weblog Awards, the world’s largest blog competition has nominated Blawg IT as one of the top ten finalists for 2006 Best Law Blog. Voting begins today. You can vote once a day, every day, per computer, for the ten day voting period.

As much as I would like to take full credit for what Blawg IT has become, I have many people to thank. My significant other has helped me considerably, but her job as a double “O” agent for MI5 prevents me from divulging any information about her (perhaps I have said too much already). I would also like to thank business lawyer Rush Nigut with whom I co-authored Yblawg: The Nuts and Bolts of Lawyer Blogging. His assistance in building Blawg IT, has been invaluable. I would like to thank my blog coaches, Mike Sansone and Sandy Renshaw who have been instrumental in Blawg IT finding its voice. I would also like to thank my readership; thank you for providing me such fantastic support and feedback over the years. It has been a wonderful conversation.

The competition should be fierce; check out the finalists:

Blawg IT (Your humble patent lawyer discussing intellectual property issues)
How Appealing (Appellate litigation)
Becker-Posner (Noble laureate Gary Becker and Seventh Circuit Judge Richard Posner)
Balkinization (Constitutional and civil liberty issues)
Concurring Opinions (Law professors opine on various legal issues)
Consumer Law & Policy Blog (More than a dozen experts discuss consumer law issues)
The Grotian Moment: Saddam Hussein Trial Blog (Experts discuss legal issues surrounding Saddam’s trial)
IMPACT (Information technology and IT blog)
The Volokh Conspiracy (Law professors discussing legal issues from libertarian and conservative perspectives)
JURIST - Paper Chase (Legal news and real-time legal research service)

If you get a chance, please swing by Weblog Awards and cast a vote for Blawg IT.

Brett Trout

Other Related Topics:
Weblog Awards, Weblog Award Finalist, Blawg IT

Zen of invention

Ever think of a solution to a difficult problem when you were in the shower? If so, you are a Zen inventor. Zen invention is the art of solving a problem with your unconscious mind. As a patent lawyer, I have seen hundreds of inventions walk through my door. I can tell immediately, whether the invention is a result of Zen invention or brute application of technology. Zen inventions are just more . . . beautiful.

Invention is something different than technology. Technology is the past. Invention is the future. Technology is science. Invention is art. The paradox is that without technology, invention cannot exist and vice versa. Necessity is indeed the mother of invention. You encounter a problem and set about to discover a solution. It is not until you encounter a problem that the Zen of invention becomes critical.

Say a lug nut on your car sticks. You arrived at the problem using known technology. You used a lug wrench for the other four lug nuts and it worked just fine. You figure, therefore, that since known technology got you through similar situations, it will work in this situation. You compile all of the known facts, prioritize them, access your complete store of knowledge and then proceed to apply the knowledge to the prioritized facts to solve the problem.

Unfortunately, the harder you force this process, the more frustrated you become. What you need to do is think like an inventor. Think of technology as a jet fighter. Think of invention as the shock wave in front of the jet fighter. If you isolate the jet fighter and try to find the invention, it is not there. It is only when the jet fighter is moving that you can access the invention. Invention is not static.

The Zen of invention involves using an unconscious analysis and unconventional approaches to examine a problem from a fresh angle. The more you are able to isolate the problem from your warehouse of knowledge, the more likely you will be able to solve the problem with your unconscious mind. Simply look at the problem without prioritizing facts or systematically accessing known technology. Strip the problem from the surrounding environment and put it into your subconscious mind. Do not think, empty your thoughts and facilitate a stream of consciousness. Zen invention brings many solutions, even if they often appear quite ridiculous.

The advantage of bringing the shockwave of your unconscious mind to bear on problems, rather than the jet fighter of your knowledge, is that the solutions provided by your unconscious mind have an inner beauty that others will recognize and appreciate with their own unconsciousness. The next time you run into a technical problem, think like an inventor. Instead of trying to force a round peg through a square hole, sit back, take a deep breath, empty your mind and let the solution come to you.

Brett Trout

Other Related Topics:
Inventors, Invention, oblique strategies, Zen, Zen the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance

Blawg Review #86 - Awesome as Hell

If you have never read Blawg Review before, you are in for a treat. Colin Samuels, author of Infamy or Praise, and winner of the 2005 award for Blawg Review of the Year, has outdone himself. Last year, his award winning Blawg Review #35 paid homage the first cantica of Dante's Divine Comedy, Inferno.

Now, Mr. Samuels takes on the second cantica, Purgatorio, with Blawg Review #86. The piece is amazing; definitely the best Blawg Review I have even seen. I would also like to thank Mr. Samuels for the tip of the hat to Blawg IT for including my World Without Lawyers post in what is sure to be another award-winning Blawg Review.

Other Related Topics:
Blawg Review, Infamy or Praise, Divine Comedy, Dante