Full defintion of Pat. Nos on PKG?

[Henrik]

Here is a simple question for most of you I gather. In the gap of my 1960 Fatboy I read "Pat. Nos on PKG". What´s does it mean and what is it refering to?? Spent some time hunting for a proper explanation but caught nothing.
...Patent numbers on package..??
Thanks!

 

[Vickers]

Patent numbers used to be stamped (or etched) on a lot of old razors.

As time marched on, the various design changes and "enhancements" became more and more frequent, and the patent numbers started piling up, so they started putting the (by now) multiple patent numbers on the box the razor came in instead of trying to squeeze all of that info either on the handle or the bottom of the head.

Also: it is a lot easier to change the printing on a box as opposed to changing the tooling involved with the actual razor.

 

[Henrik]

I say, is this not the friendliest forum on earth? Basic questions asked- rapid and informative answers within minutes. Thanks ever so much Vickers.

 

[Vickers]

My pleasure, amigo.

I collect cameras, and they ran into the same problem. You should see the numerous Pat. Nos. on some of the old Kodaks!

 

[MacDaddy]

I'm not a patent law historian (IANAPLH?) so I can't comment on exactly what the patent notice requirements have been over time; however, I believe current state is as outlined below, that a patent holder isn't required to provide notice to receive protection, but that a broader range of damages can be sought if the product is marked to provide notice.

A U.S. patentee (regardless of nationality) may give notice of its patent rights to the public. The decision to give notice is discretionary: a U.S. patentee is by no means either legally or morally obligated to do so. Yet, where that patentee (or its licensees) makes, sells, or imports a patented article, but declines to inform the public of its rights, 35 U.S.C. § 287(a) of the 1952 Patent Act (as amended) may limit its entitlement to seek past damages against infringers. Thus, as a practical matter, the decision to proactively give notice (or not) may profoundly affect the value of a specific patent as a business asset, as well as profoundly influence the risk (and possible business benefits) of infringement.

...

Section 287(a) creates two discrete paths by which U.S. patentees (and their licensees) may give effective notice of their rights as to a “patented article.” First, they can provide “constructive notice“ by marking the patented article with the number of the patent (for example, by stamping or inscribing “Pat. No.” and the serial number of the noticed patent(s) in a reasonably visible manner and location). Second, they may provide “actual notice” to selected recipients by, for instance, sending a letter notifying the recipient of the infringement. Both options impose have their own mix of costs and benefits on U.S. patent owners, as explained below.

[Source]​

 

[Henrik]

I'm not a patent law historian (IANAPLH?) so I can't comment on exactly what the patent notice requirements have been over time; however, I believe current state is as outlined below, that a patent holder isn't required to provide notice to receive protection,

I believe you are right. There is also a very thin line wether you have emaluted or imitated a certain product. From my national perspective I read in the papers a few days ago about a furniture company that had won a case in court where another comapny clearly had copied the design of one of their chairs that currently is in production.
See the web article (no you don´t have to read swedish) the original chair from the 50´s is on top pic. The "imposter" is on the bottom picture.
http://www.brandnews.se/smalandsk-designstrid

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emulation

 

[ERVARGASNY]

Wow this NOS Thingeee just got more complicated /