” I know what happened because I was there participating in the invention of the Internet , while President Obama in all due respect was in college .”
You may ask why there was so much delay between the time that the Inventor filed her writings to government agencies and her actual filing a patent application . There were several reasons . She submitted the ideas back and forth through 3 agencies from 1990-1993 because they kept telling her that although each one after reviewing the writings told her that they could not fund her – that she should submit to the next agency to see whether or not it would fund her startup Talk Shoppe Inc . in Information Retrieval . Altogether she submitted to 3 agencies , the U. S. Small Business Administration , Benjamin Franklin Technology Center , and the Penna. Dept. of Commerce . The full submissions to all 3 agencies are found in her Patent Application on the USPTO.gov website . Business Methods or Processes could not be patented until after 1999 with the passage of the America Inventors Act . She first filed in 2004 after finding out about the change in the law , but was told that she would have to refile . The Application was assigned as of March 7 , 2005 . However she also received a letter dated 6/6/6 that her application would take 12 years to prosecute – something unheard of and unusual . The Inventor alleges that she was subjected to all kinds of fraud in the Patent and Trademark Office including their removing her 4 original claims without justification – not allowed to submit new drawings – ignoring and keeping from the public what she alleges were authentic documents that had been submitted and reviewed by government employees.
She alleges that her ideas were hijacked by the government and that her idea became their ideas . Even after holding the application hostage for at least 8 years and trying to change the rules of the game while they held her patent application – not even Senators Leahy and Smith appointed by the Obama Administration could come up with patent ideas that would deny patentability based on the law . Therefore alleges the Inventor , the Patent Office got inventive with manipulations in its prosecution that were fraudulent to come up with reasons to deny the patent . With all due respect to Federal Circuit Ct. of Appeals Judges – some of whom may not even have been sending their own emails at the time- the issues regarding fraud in the Office were not closely reviewed. In the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals Affirmation of the Patent Office Decision, seen here 13-1070.opinion.3-6-2013.1– the Inventor alleges that some of the reasons given lack legal certainty . For example how can an invention be indefinite if it is dependent on machinery and/or hardware . A computer , modem , or phone is absolutely necessary to access the Internet . However the Internet was not invented by these technological gadgets ; they just make the Internet work or accessible . The Internet is actually formed by a network of computers interacting and sharing their cyberspace for the transactions and exchange of goods , ideas , and services which are the ideas submitted by the Inventor .
Before the submission of the Hartman’s ideas , computers were basically used for storage of data . Although databases were growing and some limited communications was available among the military , business , and the academic elite – the public and commerce were missing . Hartman’s proposals presented telecom in such a way as to make it not only commercial by able to absorb tremendous numbers of users by using the cyberspace latent in computers as an alternate marketplace in order to enact transactions . That is what gives the Internet its huge expansive capabilities and led to its growth and success . The letters shown above that were exchanged between the Inventor and the then Patent Commissioner David Kappos says Hartman “Puts things in their place . After this successful Internet became their invention instead of mine and they began to see the wealth and power generated by it as I had presented it in my writings – I and my role in the contribution was thrown off the grid . Even Barack Obama’s hand picked senators could not come up with a fool proof answer to denying the patent application because of constitutional concerns shown in the document below . Therefore since they could not deny based on the one year rule because of the fact that they had published and/or introduced the invention in secrecy and never really acknowledged my participation – there might be constitutional concerns . They did not give me the opportunity to bid on the contract – although obviously I would not have been able to do it without support and considerable funding . I should have been given the opportunity to at least start my own business since I was the initiator of the ideas . Nor was anyone else given the opportunity because everything was done in secret knowing nothing until Al Gore introduced the “Information Superhighway” . Therefore the fraud in the Patent Office became the way to go and to oppress my rights in every way . However this is a great wrong and I am hoping that the present administration will find an appropriate way to right the wrong .” – Inventor Dorothy M. Hartman