[espadrine]

My understanding of MPEP 2126-2128[0] is that prior art published to a website can be disqualifying.

I don’t like patents, because given the world population, any idea was had by someone that didn’t have the resources to file it. Publishing a timestamped design is, I believe, one of the least expensive ways to create prior art without creating patents.

[0]: https://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/s2128.html

[mannykannot]

If I am not mistaken, there have been many cases where prior art was available (and in some cases quite well known within the field) but did not come to the attention of the examiner (or the examiner did not recognize its relevance), and the patent was granted anyway. In fact, there was one such case on the HN top page today.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31881973

Once that happens, getting it revoked is no easy task.

[hedora]

Getting it revoked is likely harder than successfully defending against a suit. Many aggressors will fold at the "here is obvious prior art, go find someone dumber to extort" phase.