There was intellectual property-related death and mayhem in Chicago recently. A couple of patent attorneys and an office assistant were blown away by a disgruntled client. The 59 year old inventorhad evidently invested a considerable sum in lawyers fees trying to get a patent on his improved toilet for truck drivers.  At some point the inventor learned that he had been pooper scooped by others who had been issued a patent.

The client crossed the tipping point somewhere and went non-linear.   The enraged inventor entered the law offices and murdered 3 people. He was taken out by a SWAT shooter.

There is some interesting buzz over at the Volokh Conspiracy related to this matter.

Some posts back I made the plea for inventors to be more knowledgeable about the patenting process.  The attorney should be asking the question- “What’s next?”, not the client. That is to say, the client really needs to take a more hands-on approach to patent research and prosecution.  When it becomes a black box for the client, and the only part of it you can understand is the law firms invoice, it is a set up for misunderstanding.  Every inventor seeking a patent should spend time at the USPTO website doing a prior art search themselves. 

The attorney has ethical obligations in representing the client and they are institutionalized.  On the other hand, an inventor has some obligation to be informed about the basics of patenting and what constitutes realistic expectations.