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

Gear

Groklaw Gear

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


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


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
I'd go for that... if.... | 293 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
I'd go for that... if....
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 19 2013 @ 03:21 PM EDT

1) It's open to public re-exam!

2) We can submit what we view to be prior art outside of the "official channels" that the USPTO examiners are held to.

3) Any "term definitions" are subject to application of the term of art. That means we developers get to define the terms as applied to software patents. Engineers get to define the terms as applied to their particular area of expertise. Etc.

I am not saying the Patent Lawyers should not be involved in arguing the fine points of Law. But I am saying when it comes to the inventions - the inventions should not be defined by the Lawyers.

Sadly, today it seems the inventions are defined by the Lawyers and yet we inventors are the ones held to trebble damages even if we're officially (by Law) "not qualified to understand said terms".

Total accountability with no authority: the epitome of the scape goat.

RAS

[ 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 )