What connects these items?
- GB1331655 – Flying saucer
- GB1426698 – Cat flap/peace keeping bomb
- GB1333548 – Exploding nail
- GB2272154 – Ladder for spiders
The correct answer is that all of these patents appeared in a sequence of clues on popular BBC2 quiz show ‘Only Connect’, first aired on 1 December 2014. A simple enough collection for a patent attorney to guess what the connection between the clues was, but we were not given much time to dwell on exactly what was being detailed by each of the clues. After all, with such odd titles, who wouldn’t want to find out more about these inventions!
(Victoria Coren-Mitchell not finding out more about the inventions) Copyright BBC
GB’655 – this is a patent application going to an “inverted flying saucer type” aircraft, specifically being “wingless and deriving its lift only from the aerodynamic forces create by the relative air motion under, and over it”. The concept, derived by an Arthur Pedrick, appears to rely on similar principles to a helicopter to generate lift.
Surely this application is absolute nonsense? Flying saucers remain in the domain of science fiction, after all! However, upon further examination, the rotor blades bear more than a passing similarity to the lift generation means of unmanned aerial drones, and this is borne out in the literature; GB’655 is cited against, for example, US6270038, currently in force in the USA in the name of Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, and going to an unmanned aerial vehicle. Truly we live in a brave new world.
GB’698 – the first question here is clearly “how”. How can a cat flap also be a peace-keeping bomb? Looking at the patent application itself, we find that the actual title is PHOTON PUSH-PULL RADIATION DETECTOR FOR USE IN CHROMATICALLY SELECTIVE CAT FLAP CONTROL AND 1,000 MEGATON, EARTH-ORBITAL, PEACE-KEEPING BOMB. This is, if anything, less clear.
Once again, the inventor of this particular device is one Arthur Pedrick. As detailed on the programme, Mr Pedrick apparently had a lot of time on his hands. The following drawings appear to have been hand-drawn by Mr Pedrick, and help to clarify the two primary uses of the invention.
Helpfully, we are informed that Mr Pedrick’s cat was ginger, whereas his neighbour’s cat was black. By detecting the colour of the cat at the cat flap, it was possible to determine whether or not to permit entry. But, as ‘Ginger’ relayed to Mr Pedrick, “there is a much better use for your Sensitive radiation detector device”.
Apparently, the radiation detected from a pre-emptive nuclear strike could be used to track the point of origin of the missile strike, and retaliate automatically, thereby, under the principles of Mutually Assured Destruction (remember that this application was filed during the Cold War) ensuring a continuing peace.
GB’548 – there is a pattern emerging here, a connection if you will, in that the patent application for the exploding nail was also filed by Arthur Pedrick, and goes to a nail having another nail contained therein along with an explosive charge. Application of a hammer blow to the outer nail detonates the explosive charge, driving the inner nail into the wall.
Whilst impractical, it is safe to say that the patent applications above illustrate a fabulous level of creativity on the part of Mr Pedrick, and therefore it is a shame to discover, as reported on Only Connect, that Mrs Pedrick grew tired of wasting money on fantastical patent applications and put an end to it all.
GB’154 – Only Connect is a quiz show about making connections between seemingly random clues. The connection between the four documents cited in the show was purportedly that they were all invented by the same man, Arthur Pedrick. Imagine my surprise then, to find out that GB’154, going to a ‘Spider ladder provided with a means for attachment to an item of sanitary ware’, was in fact invented by one Edward Doughney. Tut tut – Only Connect’s researchers seem to have made something of a mistake here!
In any regard, the application eventually granted in an unamended form, the Examiner for the application being wholly unable to find any prior art to cite against the device.
So, what should we make of such documents? Are they simply harmless fun, or do flippant applications merely serve to exacerbate the backlog of applications to be examined at the Patent Office and waste the applicant’s own money. The citation of the flying saucer device against US’038 shows that such applications can serve to deter overly broad claims made in the advancement of new technology, whereas the spider ladder could well have been used and enforced. At the very least, these documents clearly show that the patenting process can be fun, or at least amusing.