I used your database on the Internet and I'm sorry its not there now. I
even wrote to Secretary Brown when the supply was briefly interrupted last
year. But in my field, which is chemistry, your database was largely
useless for searching. It was GREAT for quickly looking up the text of a
patent I already knew about. (But without the chemical structures I needed.)
It was fair for looking up patents by inventors or companies. I'll take
your word for it that better search tools are coming. . . . But I wonder
how quickly they're coming for chemists. Lexis-Nexis is coming out with
patent drawings online. That's great for mechanical patents or design of a
better tennis shoe. But Lexis-Nexis isn't including the in-text chemical
structures that we need for understanding whats really being talked about in
a chemical patent. Even if they included the in-text drawings, the
structures wouldn't be searchable.
I know that you do searching in the computer area. However, unless you've
ever done much chemical searching, you haven't walked a mile in our moccasins.
The supercomputers you speak of may indeed be coming. BUT THEY ARE NOT
THERE YET AND THEY WON'T BE THERE TOMORROW. The danger is, the people
holding the corporate purse strings read the misleading hype (or MAYBE its a
truthful prediction of the future) in places like the Wall Street Journal
and then THEY BELIEVE IT, and THEY THINK ITS HERE NOW!!! They don't realize
that chemical searching is an entirely different proposition than searching
for a better mousetrap. They think that their companies can do away with
expensive Derwent subscriptions. They think everyone can do their own
chemical searching for free on the Internet!! Now! They want to cut the
budget for database building NOW based on the hype and futuristic predictions.
I do want easily accessible patent information. I want it all the way back
to US patent #1, mostly for document delivery purposes. Right now the best
I can usually do is wait for a 24-hour fax. I'd love for that text to be on
the Internet. Our old paper patent files are invaluable for tracking back
through time. Corporate management would probably rather have the space --
after all, "you can get all that free on the Internet."
Your comments make it clear that you really don't understand what we're
dealing with. Before assuming that you do, perhaps you should make a
little effort to learn what chemical searching involves.
> Recently Nancy Lambert sent out her defense of patent information provide
r
>dinosaurs. As her piece reflects both a naive understanding of current
>computer search and database technology, plus contains at least one lie
>(possibly directed at me), I thought I would critique parts of her article
>plus some of the quotes that appear in it. For the record, I offer prior
>art search services in the field of computing, and I also maintain the Web
>site with patent titles and nine years of abstracts which is disparaged in
>the following piece.
>
>Greg Aharonian
>Internet Patent News Service
>srctran@world.std.com
>