Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

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

Gear

Groklaw Gear

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

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:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

Because the Elements of the periodic table are known. | 269 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

Because the Elements of the periodic table are known.

Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 15 2013 @ 03:36 PM EDT

If you invent a new one, I dare say it will be patentable.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Because the Elements of the periodic table are known. - Authored by: DannyB on Monday, April 15 2013 @ 03:50 PM EDT
Americium US patent - 3,156,523, Curium - US patent 3,161,462.-n/t - Authored by: macliam on Monday, April 15 2013 @ 07:57 PM EDT
- Patented Elements 95 and 96! - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 16 2013 @ 11:33 AM EDT
- Why? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 16 2013 @ 01:06 PM EDT
  - They are both new compositions of matter - Authored by: cjk fossman on Tuesday, April 16 2013 @ 10:49 PM EDT

What we need is some IP sanity here

Authored by: darrellb on Monday, April 15 2013 @ 04:19 PM EDT

Long sequences of letters A, C, T and G are not the subject of the patent.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

What we need is some IP sanity here - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 15 2013 @ 06:47 PM EDT
So, what is the subject? - Authored by: marcosdumay on Tuesday, April 16 2013 @ 07:53 AM EDT

What we need is some IP sanity here

Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 16 2013 @ 05:34 AM EDT

then why shouldn't they be able to own numbers as well?

Isn't that the reason that Intel didn't use the 586 moniker for their follow up to the 486 as they found they couldn't own (via trademark) numbers? (They called it the pentium instead - shouldn't the pentium II have been called the hexium?)

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

What we need is some IP sanity here - Authored by: DannyB on Tuesday, April 16 2013 @ 08:55 AM EDT

What we need is some IP sanity here

Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 16 2013 @ 05:43 AM EDT

Or ages, such as becoming 35 years of age?

Sorry, don't think you'd be able to patent that: Logan's Run would be prior art!?

[ 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 )