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 | # ]
|