decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Such things as voltage: not needed | 756 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Such things as voltage: not needed
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, July 20 2012 @ 12:50 PM EDT
Show me the patent to which you are referring and I will show you where you are
mistaken.

As a related side note, you should be aware that in order to keep patent
applications to a manageable size and to prevent every application from starting
with F=ma, the requirement is that the invention be described in such a way so
that one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to make and use the
invention without undue experimentation.

Given that the vast majority of posters here think all software is obvious, it
would be very hard for a patent application to not meet that one of ordinary
skill in the art requirement.

Under that rubric, and given the existence of Siri, I may have to back pedal a
bit. 2001 might now provide sufficient disclosure to make HAL obvious. On the
other hand, Siri isn't quite HAL ....

In any event, it would be a more powerful rejection for an examiner to cite
technical papers relating to the various aspects of HAL (or Siri) than it would
be to point to 2001 itself.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )