|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 13 2012 @ 02:44 PM EDT |
You don't need to assume one of cognitive deficiency or dishonesty, I thought we
covered that. We could also agree that being unreasonable is not always a sign
of cognitive deficiency.
I don't think that (2) is true as stated: I don't think it's necessarily
obvious, unless "presented" can mean "studied in depth"
(possibly for a significant amount of time).
I think you might want to add (4) to your list, though: lawyers are trained to
do (3) and then argue the opposite as though they had not agreed, and don't
always see the contradiction. Unfortunately that's is only partially a
tongue-in-cheek statement. I think we have an example of Prof. Risch doing just
that at least once in the comments to this article.
Also, I suspect that (1) is true, I think it has been done, formally, though I
don't have a reference for you. Someone else mentioned this in another comment
as well.
I'm certain, however, that there are both lawyers and law professors outside of
Groklaw who agree that software is not valid subject matter under US patent law
(and international treaties as they are written). And for clarity I'm not
referring obliquely to myself here.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
