Introduction
___.In spite of our planet becoming a Global Village, tied-up by economics and interconnected through the Internet, the media keeps us aware only with the main events, seldom providing an insight on professions. The invitation to teach orthodontic biomaterials, however, has allowed us to report on the status of orthodontics in Russia and East-European countries1,2, of course with the focus on biomaterials. Among the surprising news reported from Moscow was the use of traditional Chinese medicine to monitor the general afflictions produced on patients by the edgewise treatment3.
___.Recently, responding to an invitation from several Chinese universities (Beijing, Xian, Chengdu and Kunming), we made a teaching tour, with the hope to find some other offbeat studies. As in other Communist countries, the central government of China was in the past against ortho–dontics, as it was considered to address just "aesthetics". Since 1976, the situation there has significantly improved in both dentistry and orthodontics.
Dentistry. In 1978, a system of postgraduate academic training was established, and a first Ph.D. in Dentistry was awarded by the Beijing Medical University. Today, several hundred master and doctor degrees are awarded each year, and there are no less than fifteen professional journals, all in Chinese, sometimes with English titles or abstracts. One is, however, written in English, The Chinese Journal of Dental Research, and is published in cooperation with Quintessence Publishing Co. Its goal is to disseminate the research activities of the Chinese authors from the mainland, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan. In addition, international meetings (Sino-Dentech) take place every year. As the number of dentists in China has increased to one per 45,000 citizens(!), they even have a journal dedicated to dental products (International Dental Products for China), founded in 1996, a cooperative effort between Rudolf Roser Verlag from Germany and the Society of Stomatology of the China Medical Association (www.roeser-online.de; e-mail asia@roeser-online.de.
Orthodontics. Even though in 1997 China has hosted in Beijing a major meeting attended by many luminaries, and there is an ongoing exchange with Westerners, there is still room for improvement. The first specialty of dentistry has no journal and relies only on books such as the Handbook of Orthodontics by R.E. Moyers and Orthodontics, Current Principles and Techniques, T. M. Graber & R. Vanarsdall editors, both printed in Chinese characters. In addition, courses are held by foreign professors and specialists. We couldn't find, however, any orthodontic material advertised in International Dental Products for China. Notably among those who previously taught in China were Professors T.M. Graber, C.A. Evans, T.J. Aoba and T. Sellke, all from the University of Illinois at Chicago. While too few mainland Chinese clinicians have studied in the U.S., several professors from the mainland have visited both this country and Europe to assist such meetings as the annual A.A.O. and E.O.S. conventions. Today, the climate on both sides is favorable to encounters, and at least, in our case, the Chinese were very considerate hosts. Proper accommodations and banquets aside (once in a while spiced up with snakes, snake-wine, fried worms, etc.), we were guided and driven each time in university cars to see unforgettable landmarks.
___.We found the American orthodontic methods well established, with the same preferences for techniques and biomaterials that we are acquainted. This was surprising, in view of the fact that in other formerly Communist Eastern European countries there was, and still is, some resistance to fixed appliances (see our interview with H. P. Bimler4). The reason is that the Chinese have not been exposed to an "induction" period (orthodontics practically started only after 1976). Thanks to professors Fu Min-Kui, Head of the Beijing University Orthodontic Department (who studied at Northwestern University) and Ye Xiang-Yu (who studied at Harvard and teaches at the Xian Medical University), the Chinese stepped directly into direct-bonding as soon as they were allowed to use and espouse foreign science. Like in other Asian countries (India, Thailand), in an attempt to save money but offering less, around 1985 the Chinese adopted the Begg technique, and even today, edgewise brackets exhibiting vertical slot are sought after. As a result, mainland Chinese orthodontists may have not matured enough to show results in international meetings: thus, none has exhibited at the AAO meetings in Philadelphia (1997) and Dallas (1998). The ratio of posters presented by China's neighbors (Japan, Korea, India, Hong Kong, Singapore) versus all of those exhibited was very high, being 44:107 and 31:106, respectively.
___.Biomaterials.
Steels. The Chinese used iron at the time both Europe and Egypt were still in theBronze Age. Knowing that, we were not surprised to see in the universities we visited high quality stainless steel (AISI 304 or 316) attachments -made by casting/injection molding- which were used along nickel-titanium arch wires.
___.The bracket manufacture in China started in 1993 with the help of Professor Fu Min-Kui, and the NiTi arches with that of Professor Ye Xiang-Yu, both previously mentioned. Many attmpts were made to manufacture brackets. However, today, the most successful ones are made in Hang Zhou, China's Venice, near Shanghai, by the Xin Ya Automatic Instrument and Materials Factory.
___.As soon as we returned from our three week trip, we checked their corrosion resistance using the accelerated test we have repeatedly described5-7 only to find that, like the Russians, the Chinese were too new and innocent in the attachments' manufacturing business to replace difficult to cut steels with the so called "automatic" ones, such as AISI 303 (the latter, due to its higher content in sulfur, is indeed easier to machine, but also more corrosion susceptible).
Brackets. All the attachments we saw were not shiny, probably as a result of being injection molded. All were monoblock (i.e. one-piece) with bases which exhibit a rather poor adhesive retention (too superficial or open undercuts). Their standard edgewise brackets (no torque, no angulation) are twins endowed with distal power arms on the cuspids. This correlates to the status we were at a decade ago...
___.Their preadjusted brackets are surely quite different from what we may have expected: for starters, their name clearly written on the plastic box hosting the set: Tip-Edge (Fig.1), i.e. a T.P. Orthodontics trademark. Our assumption that there may have been some agreement between the Chinese and American companies became questionable the moment we saw the way the vertical slot was cut. Indeed, in compound, mesh-based brackets, the vertical slot is formed by brazing to a base a bracket provided with a cut parallel to the tie wings (Fig, 2a). Choosing to use the easier to manufacture one-piece brackets, the Chinese have cut the vertical slot through the base.The cut was made obliquely, in the hope that its thin opening and long traject will prevent its clogging with adhesive (Fig. 2b). Seen from a bird's eye prospective, the original and its Chinese version, the two brackets (upper laterals), look almost the same, Fig. 3a, 3b.
Arch wires. The "Chinese NiTi wires" are not new to the Western practitioner. Presented under this name at many European and American meetings, these were praised by luminaries such as Burstone8. Developed at the Institute for Non-Ferrous Metals in Beijing by Dr. Tien Hua and associates, the alloys' properties later were found to be the same as these of a Japanese one9, and in fact characteristic for the phase-proportion austenite/ martensite10.
___.We visited Xian hoping to see an important titanium plant which was visited in the past by several clinical professors: our desire to see it, as well as the Northwest Institute for Nonferrous Metal Research, was short-lived. If as an engineer, I could have raised suspicions in this secretive country, I was considered instead savvy enough to be handed a technical brochure entitled "A new medical titanium alloy". In it, a titanium-aluminum-vanadium alloy (often used for attachments and implants), was compared with one in which vanadium was replaced with molybdenum and zirconium, alloy they call TAMZ (a similar one, Ti15Mo5Zr3Al is well known11). Compared to the above mentioned Ti6A4V, TAMZ is described as having a middle strength, a good resistance to fatigue and a high toughness (the most important mechanical property when it comes to orthodontic appliances). Not only could it not release vanadium, considered toxic, but the corrosion resistance of this biocompatible alloy was described as being as high as 1.5 times that of Ti6A4V. While the new alloy is available in plate, sheet, tube or wire form, we are not aware if there is any orthodontic attachment made of this new alloy.
___.Conclusions
___.From ancient times, China has tried to live as a closed society (near the Temple of Harvest, there is a place once believed to be the Center of the Earth). Its recent openness to Western values is just a second long, when compared with the many dark years this most populous country has experienced. While we hope that this trend will last, things do not always happen the way we want. Near Orlando, Florida, there is a less-known theme park, "Splendid China", exhibiting the beauties of the country. Hundreds, if not thousands of Chinese craftsmen may have been used to skilfully present many worthwhile landmarks which are reduced to various scales. We visited the park about three years ago, and along with thousands of other visitors, were impressed by the miniatures which were meticulosly well kept.
___.Returning from China, we wanted to revisit the park, this time with an "experienced" eye. We were bitterly disappointed: while the exhibits were still there, both the park's personnel and the visitor attendance was minimal. The maintenance and upkeep was very poor, as demonstrated by obviously missing pieces (no guards!), broken or mixed-up porcelain figurines, rotten mini-buildings from which weeds were growing. We asked how was this possible, in so few years. The answer was simple: the park's leadership from China has decided to operate the park without any local help...
___.Let us hope that the "Chinese Spring" we saw visiting several universities will last, and their contact with the Western World will not be undercut the same way as their theme park in Orlando.
References
1. Matasa CG, Orthodontics in Eastern Europe, Phoenix without ashes, December 1991; 4 (1): 3-5
2. Matasa CG, Orthodontics in the former USSR, Phoenix without ashes April 1992; 5(1): 7
3. Matasa CG, The traditional Chinese medicine and the edgewise technique, Orthodontic materials insider December 1995, 8(4): 7-8
4. Could the gap be ever bridged? (Interview with Dr. H.P. Bimler), Phoenix without ashes, Dec. 1993; 6(4): 3-6
5. Matasa CG, Facts about bracket corrosion, Phoenix without ashes, June 1992; 5(2): 4-8
6. Matasa CG, Orthodontic attachment corrosion susceptibilities, J. Clin. Orthod. 1995; 29(1): 16-23
7. Matasa CG, Nicht rostende Edelstahle und Direkt-Bonding Brackets. II Chemishes Verhalten (In German: Stainless steels and direct bonding brackets. II Chemical properties), Informationen aus Orthodontie und Kieferorthopadie, 1993; 25(2): 147-166
8. Burstone CJ, Qin B, Morton JY, Chinese NiTi wire a new orthodontic alloy, Am. J. Orthod. Dentofac Orthop. 1985: 87: 445-452
9. Bending properties of superelastic and nonsuperelastic NiTi wires, Khier SE, Brantley WA, Fournelle RA, Am. J. Orthod. Dentofac Orthop. 1991; 99: 310-318
10. Matasa CG, NiTi alloys: two metals in one, The orthodontic materials insider, 1997; 10(1): 2-7
11. Nishimura T, in: Titanium alloys, Boyer R ed., ASM International, Columbus OH 1994: 949

AN INSIDIOUS SYNDROME MAY THREATEN YOUR PRACTICE: "PATENTITE"

Introduction
___.Two unrelated events which occurred this February have determined this editor to bring forth a subject which may seem far away from the daily preoccupations of a clinician. The first was a delay in the completion of two theses in the master of science in oral sciences program at a major U.S. university, and the second a freshly released book. Both theses dealt with patentable inventions, and lacked the description of their objects due to... “restrictions of U.S. patent and intellectual properties”. The book, entitled “Owning the future” warns that freely shared knowledge is fast becoming an endangered species, monopolies concentrating vital information in the hands of few. Whether we like it or not, intellectual property problems permeate our lives. While years ago, such disputes affected companies rather than persons, today these poison the relationships between countries. The recent disputes over software with China, over the privatizing of several varieties of crops and natural pesticides in India, or with Thailand and Ecuador, over natural medicines and healing techniques, have not yet been solved.
___.A large number of the things we use, see, eat or even hear are today patented. Most of the soy beans used in the USA (crop which ranks second after wheat), cannot be replanted without permission (genetically manipulated food is all too common in our groceries). A particular Shakespearean interpretation is now proprietary, as are NBC’s three chimes which accompany their peacock logo, or a certain move of an athlete1. In an attempt to sue Ortho-Cycle Co., Ormco has even asserted that it maintains its right upon their patented brackets long after they were sold... Carried to the extreme, tomorrow you may not be able to sell your car without the manufacturers’ permission. If you, as a clinician, think that this is limited only to man-made things (”anything under the sun made by man”1), i.e. to your purchased tools, you are wrong.
Medical procedures now are patented like never before, as we will show below.
___.The reason is simple: money. The U.S. is the world’s largest producer of intellectual property, from computer software to movies and pharmaceuticals, and patents are its “crown jewels”. Texas Instruments has earned its larger portion of $200 million in annual profits from licensing patents and winning infringement cases rather than from selling products. By exploiting their patents, pharmaceutical companies are not just covering the risk involved in bringing a drug from conception to FDA approval (which amounts in average to some $250 million) but also reap a hefty profit.
___.What follows is an attempt to present data which could be useful both to the inventive practitioner and to the user of patented items.
___.How it all started
___.The desire to acquire rights upon intellectual properties is perhaps as old as our civilization: from antiquity until today, construction secrets were passed on only against servitude or remuneration. Brunelleschi (1377-1446), the famed architect who built Florence’s cathedral Santa Maria del Fiore and the Pitti palace, forced its city to grant him rights for navigating the Arno against a vague description of the related means. Hooke (1635-1703), the discoverer of the stress-strain relationship, challenged the rest of the learned of his time to find this relationship while protecting himself with the anagram of the latin words “ut tensio, sic vis” (as the force, so is the deformation).
___.In the U.S., the patent system is based upon the Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution which states that the Congress has the power to “promote the progress of science and useful arts by securing for a limited time to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and inventions”. The Patent Act was signed by President Washington in 1790, himself being the C.E.O. of the new Patent Commission. Later on, President Lincoln hoped that the system will add “the fuel of interest to the fire of genius”. What genius it takes today to get a patent we will see later...
___.The system has been repeatedly modified during the years: until 1870, the patent applicants were asked to submit physical models of their inventions. That year, the old patent building burned, and the weight switched to concepts instead of models (the advent of computer software would have done with them anyway). Today, the main body of law concerning patents is in Title 35 of the U.S. Code, paragraphs 101-103. According to the GATT Agreement, the U.S. had to extend the “limited time" from 17 to 20 years, like most other countries. The Federal agency administrating the patent laws is The Patent and Trademark Office, located in Crystal City, VA, a short drive from Washington DC across the Potomac, a walking distance from the R. Reagan (former National) Airport. In its buildings work about 2000 examiners helped by thousands of support staff. The library, adorned with pictures of several of the country’s geniuses (the few models preserved from the last century are kept in a separate hall) is endowed not only with a multitude of shelves on which rest the almost 6,000,000 US patent copies granted up to date, divided according to classes, but also with modern means of retrieval, identification and copying. At your place, abstracts of the patents can be searched online (like Medline) due to a grant from IBM (visit http://patent.womplex.ibm.com and then specify “orthodontics”. If you already know a patent number, visit http://patent.womplex.ibm.com/patquery).
___.Filling a patent
___.Checking with the help of the Orthodontic Directory of the World, about one in four of the inventors who have filled in the last decade a U.S. Patent in orthodontics has his exclusive practice2. As occasionally we are consulted on the matter, we have observed an increased interest in patenting. As a result, we will try to present some information on the procedure, in case you want to save from the $2000-$5000 attorney fee which is commonly charged according to the complexity of the patent.
___.One should do his own search: a professional understands better his domain than the average attorney (examiners and judges have tough times to follow the intricate details specific to the field). As the classification of a patent is not always properly done, it is advisable to search more classes than the one to which the application belongs: this avoids spending money for something which has already been described. A Do-it yourself-patent-application kit3 ($32.95) may save you money, even if ultimately you may have to have recourse to a patent lawyer. One should not forget that while in Edison’s time, some of his 1093 patent letters were shorter than a page, today there are patents numbering in the hundreds of pages.
___.Unfortunately, as a recent ABC-TV 20/20 program broadcast has exposed, there are also unethical companies which offer to file, review, market or submit inventions to manufacturers. A better way is to contact instead registered patent attorneys. The US Patent and Trademark Office can send you a list with the Registered Patent Attorneys in your area. Some of them offer to “small inventors” free initial interviews over the phone4.
___.Some do not want to go to the hassle of patenting (they have to pay each year incremental amounts in the hope they will make money), but want protection against others who may later find the same thing: -it happened! In such cases it is useful to describe the finding in a specialized "Account book, S-149" (Wilson Jones, Acco USA, Wheeling, IL) which provides the necessary instructions.
___.According to Title 35 of the US Code paragraph 102 (b), a patent cannot be awarded if “the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country, or in public use or on sale in this country, more than a year prior to the date of the application.”
Paragraph 103 of the same code states that in order to be patented, an invention should be useful and nonobvious. In the past, also a certain “level or standard of the invention” was required: after 1952, this was substituted with the less demanding concept of “nonobviousness”, or unexpectedness to people skilled in that art. Thus, if the invention combines known elements, but no prior patent or publication expressly or impliedly suggest combining those specific elements (novelty), the invention is probably nonobvious. In the practical determination of nonobviousness, post-filing events play a major role. Among these are commercial success, prompt copying, extensive licensing and replacement of prior art with the object of the invention, and even... the educational level of the inventor.
___.Ideas cannot be patented, but a combination of known elements can, and as long there is synergism (that is when the effect obtained is greater than the sum of the component effects taken separately). The concept starts from the premise that all machines are made of the same elements, and all compositions from the same substances. Formally, any patent should have three parts: a description of the prior art, the identification of the invention’s best mode for implementation, and the claims, which constitute the legal definition of the scope of the invention.
___.In other countries, especially in several European ones, the novelty and nonobviousness required in the U.S. patents is not enough. Indeed, there it is necessary to demonstrate a definite advance versus the prior art, to delimitate the latter from the invention (through standard words which separate these two parts, like“characterized by”) and to closely relate the claims to the examples given. U.S. patents are obviously more lax, and as a result, it is estimated1 that many of these are questionable (50-70%, or 40,000 at the end of the decade1).
___.Problems with the US Patents
___.Before the present Patent System , the country was so backward that when Fulton built his steamboat, he had to bring the engine from England, as there were no means to build it in the U.S. As a result of the system, the inventivity and the related technology lead to the creation of aviation (by two bicycle mechanics from Ohio, the Wright brothers), of the electric light (by a farm boy, Edison), etc.
Uncertainty. Its opponents claim that the system is actually a lottery6, and the AT&T story is a good example: when Bell’s patent was rejected in a lower court, he tried it in the Supreme Court only to have it latter upheld by one vote. This didn’t hinder AT&T to collect almost six trillion dollars in revenues in the 100 years following that decision. Others have demonstrated that there is a statistically significant difference among the way the patent law is applied5. To avoid both costs and uncontrolled extension of their intellectual property, many companies (such as DuPont) prefer not to disclose their inventions, protecting themselves against infringements by documenting prior use.
Facility. Let us exemplify the cases of the green computer5 and the red chair1. While both objects and colors are common, both combinations have never been claimed. In the first case, the inventor claimed that the green color absorbs both cosmic and UV rays, known to interfere with the computer’s function. As far as the red chair concerned, William Budinger, CEO of Rodel Inc. and holder of many patents, claims that he could get a patent on it1, provided that nobody has previously filed one (over 150,000 U.S. Patents were awarded in 1998 alone!). It is obvious that some advantages can always be "invented"... This cannot but be helped by the normal lack of specialized knowledge that many of the examiners (and judges) exhibit. Examples are the recent patenting of a method of keyboard searching, known for decades, and in electricity, of Kirchoff’s (1824-1887) law 1...
Broadness. The common procedure is to claim as much as possible, in the hope that after examination, something will still remain. Often, these extended claims remain undisputed and large domains of knowledge become private properties. Thus, J. Lemelson, “a thinker, not a tinkerer” covered in 1954 the whole field of machine vision by describing “automatic detection” as broadly and generally as possible, thus practically monopolizing the field. While a patent limits protection to 17 (now 20) years, through “divisions” and “continuations”, his skilled lawyers have succeeded to extend it for forty years, each time including whatever new developments were disclosed by others1. Likewise, the patenting of “multimedia”7 stirred a broad protest, as what was contained in its 41 claims (“a 41 count snow job”1) was considered to be similar to “patenting the English language”8.
Unsustainable claims. Breadth could be effectively stymied by exacting from the inventor detailed examples which would surely stimulate development. Unfortunately, such demands, if ever asked, are often bypassed or substituted for generalities. The broad, unsustained claims of today are in sharp contrast with Edison’s steady efforts to tie in "R & D" the "R" to the “D”...
Inflexibility. While easy to get, U.S. patents are difficult to infringe even when shaky due to legal difficulties. Average patent infringement cases that go on trial may cost litigants over a l million dollars in legal fees, and even a preliminary court skirmish may raise it to $100,000. As a result, even large companies such as IBM agree to license broad and disputable patents (e.g. on Internet commerce9) than to fight them.
Questionable ethics. In time, a series of indisputable inventors ranging from Benjamin Franklin to Jonas Salk have refrained from patenting, offering their creation to mankind for free. What would have happened if each time Pasteur’s vaccine or Heimlich’s maneuver would have been applied, a permission would have been needed, or a royalty collected? Many consider that as U.S. taxpayers contribute some $60 billion annually to underwrite the bulk of the nations basic research and development at universities, institutes and laboratories, all their results should be available to the public for free. Fortunately for us, NIST in Gaithersburg (the Paffenbarger Research Center specializes in dental materials) seems to be rather unique in this respect, as its patents are free to the U.S. users. According to G. Soros, the famous financier, “unless it is tempered by the recognition of a common interest that ought to take precedent over particular interest, our present system -which however imperfect, qualifies as an open society- is liable to break down”10.
___.As a result of such deficiencies, the present U.S. patent system has been vehemently attacked through a bill ushered through the U.S. Senate and known as S-507 or “The omnibus patent act of 1997”.
Whatever its faults, the facts demonstrate that the U.S. Patent System remains great, and at least for some time to come, we will have to live with it as it is.
___.Patents and medicine
___.Until few decades ago, medical patents focused only on palpable material items. A patent search today shows more and more patents on gene sequences, genomes, therapies, methods, tests, etc. While some of these are considered obvious, such as sex visualization in fetuses via ultrasound11, others have presumably captured procedures which may have been in general use for years12. Is patenting working against the Hippocratic oath, or the discussion and then the signing of confidentiality/undisclosure agreements prior to their inter-consultations at the patient’s bedside, the way of tomorrow? Both the reluctance of a student to disclose to his professors the patentable aspects of the thesis he is defending, and the clinician-suing-clinician policy recently observed, may indeed signal a new era...
___.Patents and orthodontics
___.The profession seems to follow the example of its recognized father, E.H. Angle, who filed no less than 28 patents. The first was issued in 188913, and the last (filed by his wife, Ana Hopkins Angle, executrix) in 193414. Most of the titles he used were very short, usually two words such as “Orthodontic appliance”, while the text extended on less than three pages. After a little over a hundred years, a patent the title of which starts with the same words, "Orthodontic appliance", may have its text printed with considerably smaller fonts on not less than twelve pages15...
___.U.S. Patents in orthodontics, or related to ortho–dontic materials, are comprised, at least today, mostly within the classes 433/8-20 and 32/14 (attachments), 184/402-406 & 148/402-426 (wires), 260/42; 433/8-9, 220; 106/35; 260/42; 422/9; 427/379; 206/63 (adhesives).
___.Aside from few clinicians who act as free-lancers, most of the orthodontics' related patents, which often have clinicians as co-authors, are assigned to giant international pharmaceutical companies such as Bristol Myers-Squibb or Johnson & Johnson (to which Unitek and “A”-Co. still belong, or at least belonged, respectively).
___.Aside from the many valuable patents which turned orthodontics from an art into a science, there are also many patents which in the view of the writer shouldn't have been awarded. Some do not bring progress, while others are combinations which lack the important element of synergy, are too obvious, or lack usefulness. Others lead to a monopolization of an entire domain without proper support. In the following few examples, a description of the principle is followed by our objection.
___.Allen M.D. Orthodontic bracket, USP 5,226,814’93, Fig.1
1.Adds wings to a twin bracket already endowed with a power arm.
2. Redundant control of rotation: a simple combination leading to predictable results. No "level", no "synergy"! .
___.Kessling PC, Orthodontic light wire appliance, USP 4,180,912’80, Fig. 2; C-T Chang, Esthetic bracket protector, USP 5,160,260’92, Fig.3; Wool AL, Orthodontic device, USP 4,585,413’86, Fig.4.
1. Plastic covers hiding brackets.
2. Promote crevice corrosion, generate cleaning problems. Sacrifices health to an already socially accepted aspect.
___.Kurz CH, Orthodontic bracket for a doubled-over tie ligature, USP 4,614,497’86, Fig.5
1. The ligature tie is doubled to “positively” retain the arch wire into the slot.
2. Significantly increases friction: modern brackets (Shoulder TM, SynergyTM, Miura) use ligatures mainly to avoid the arch wire from getting out of the slot.
___.Chen AC, DeLuca RD, Jones MF, Mueller DS, Yeganeh MS, Adhesive primer for alumina brackets, USP 4,826,430’89
1. In view of their bonding, coats alumina (sapphire) brackets with silica to have them primed with silanes.
2. Unnecessary, complicated step: alumina can be well primed with silanes without any silica coating.
Obvious, no "synergy".
___.Sachdeva RCL, Orthodontic bracket, USP 5,232,361’93. (assigned to Dentaurum)
1. Uses 40 to 99% titanium, zirconium, silicon, boron, beryllium, chromium, niobium or cobalt alloys for brackets and claims several known surface treatments for these.
2. The replacement of an alloy with another known one in a known object lacks "synergy", "obviousness" and "level". Simple combination with predictable results. Claims surface treatments without supporting them with examples. Its broad range inhibits research both in alloys as well as in the surface treatments needed to render aesthetic the unsightly Ti. (By the same token, Mo, Ta, etc. could equally claimed, as these too have a better corrosion resistance than stainless steel).
___.Fujita K, Orthodontic appliance, USP 4,209,906 ’80, Fig. 6
1. Lingual brackets with grooves where various pins can be inserted.
2. Complicated and highly difficult to manage parts, knowing their minute size.
___.Fastnacht JL, Orthodontic elastic band and treatment method, USP 4,818,225’89
1. Adds to the elastomer’s composition up to 10% of a flavoring substance (others add water-soluble fluorides!).
2. Non-polymerizable ingredients interfere with the strength of the polymer. Leached perfume or salts generate undesirable surface imperfections (Other patents actually attempt to seal the latter!).
___.Prins SP, Adjustable orthodontic bracket, USP 4,243,387’79, Fig. 7; Beazley WW, Orthodontic appliance, USP 4,416,627’83, Fig. 8
1.Movable elements superimposed upon brackets.
2. Complicated constructions; all impede cleaning.
___.Riebschleger RP, Retentive orthodontic dental bracket, USP 5,435,720’95, Fig. 9
1. Bracket base plate with multiple openings allowing the cured glue to form enlarged heads toward the outer surface of the plate in order to secure bonding.
2. Reuse of an older concept (Waller, US 4,063,360’77, Fig. 10) proven since long to be ineffective (abrasion of the adhesive leads to bracket detachment).
___.Rauch MA, Boni RL, Hadnagy TD, Intraoral fusion process, USP 3,924,332’75, Fig. 11
1. Uses 110 volts to weld orthodontic appliances in the children’s mouth.
2. Unlikely to have takers: possible hazards, questionable control.
___.Ashinoff LA, Decorative orthodontic brace and method, USP 5,240,413’93, Fig.12
1. Adorns bracket interspace with charms.
2. No "level", no "synergy". Interferes with the arch wire’s flexing and generates corrosion and cleaning problems.
___.Conclusions
___.Patents are vital knowledge resources that are insufficiently known by orthodontists: reading patents may have brought in these few "a flash of genius". Unfortunately, the time when the average clinician could innovate without paying attention to them has past, as new trends have now appeared.
___.A first one is to claim property on anything which may be of some use. This leads to an exaggerated "discretion" and deprives our society. As it has become easy to get a patent on obvious combinations which lack either "level" or "synergy", this has seriously narrowed the field of free knowledge. With the unconscious help of the U.S. Patent office, this has lead to monopolies on what is our technological and cultural heritage, thus blocking the competitive developments in certain areas.
___.A second trend is to claim (and get!) concepts, instead of explicit, factual inventions. Along with the technique of continuing inventions beyond their actual limit of twenty years, this chokes productivity and generates a "tabu" on fields which are thus condemned to remain unresearched.
___.An even more worrisome trend shows that modern patents are now extending from objects to procedures. Without knowing the field, the clinician may find himself being sued for something he was using or doing for years. However, to end on a note of optimism, there are now plenty of voices which are protesting against the above mentioned inequities, which all erode an institution otherwise highly beneficial to our society.
Note: This writer has two dozens of inventions patented all over the world, among which several in the U.S. He has also authored articles on patenting.
___.References
1. Shulman S, Owning the future, Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, 1999
2. Orthodontic Directory of the World, Oliver WH editor, Nashville, 1998
3. McArthur & Associates, POB 250, Harvest, AL 35749
4. American Patent &Trademark Law Center, S. Diego, CA, ph. 619/292-0901, fax 292-0905
5. Kayton I. Patent practice, fifth ed., vol.1, Patent Resources Inst., Washington DC 1996
6. Forbes magazine, March 29, 1993
7. Fourteen inventors, Encyclopaedia Britanica Inc. assignee, “Multimedia search system”,USP5,241,671’93
8. Lewis P, "A new patent is infuriating the multimedia industry", New York Times, Nov. 28, 1993 (Freeny C, “System for reproducing information on material objects at a point of sale location”, USP 4,528,643’85)
10. "The capitalist threat", Atlantic Monthly, February 1997: 48
11. Stephens JD, “Fetal anatomic sex assignment by ultra sonography during early pregnancy”, USP 4,986,274’91
12. Pallin SL, Method of making self-healing episcleral incision, USP 5,080,111’92
13. Angle EH, Dental regulating screw, USP 399,177, 1889
14. Angle EH, Orthodontic appliance, USP 1,949,444’34
15. Andreiko CA, Payne MA, Orthodontic appliance and... USP 5,533,895’ 96