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
USPTO - Usually Someone Patenting The Obvious? Glad to see the worm turning at last | 210 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
So when do we start talking about Patent Extortion Entities???
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, April 21 2013 @ 09:46 PM EDT
(Christenson)

[ Reply to This | # ]

Corrections Thread
Authored by: artp on Sunday, April 21 2013 @ 10:21 PM EDT
Typo in the Title Block, if it fits.

---
Userfriendly on WGA server outage:
When you're chained to an oar you don't think you should go down when the galley
sinks ?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Off Topic Thread
Authored by: artp on Sunday, April 21 2013 @ 10:23 PM EDT
For those items that are waaaay out there.


---
Userfriendly on WGA server outage:
When you're chained to an oar you don't think you should go down when the galley
sinks ?

[ Reply to This | # ]

News Picks Thread
Authored by: artp on Sunday, April 21 2013 @ 10:24 PM EDT
URL, please.

---
Userfriendly on WGA server outage:
When you're chained to an oar you don't think you should go down when the galley
sinks ?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Comes Goes Here
Authored by: artp on Sunday, April 21 2013 @ 10:31 PM EDT
See link above - "Comes v. MS" - for further details on how
to help and where to help.

Thank you.

---
Userfriendly on WGA server outage:
When you're chained to an oar you don't think you should go down when the galley
sinks ?

[ Reply to This | # ]

USPTO - Usually Someone Patenting The Obvious? Glad to see the worm turning at last
Authored by: SirHumphrey on Monday, April 22 2013 @ 12:32 AM EDT
Although we have been frustrated by some of the actions of the USPTO, they are
not alone in that regard, but this is certainly an encouraging development,
especially if it gains real traction.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Off topic -- kinda
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 22 2013 @ 04:35 AM EDT
Ya'know, Apple based its OS-X on BSD, an open-source OS that can be modified,
then the resulting OS made closed source. Now, they're trying to kill off open
source -- or at least Android.
It's my impression that RMS is -- or at least was -- a champion of the BSD
license, which allows one to make the closed-source step. Without this, Apple
would not have OS-X, at least not without a whole lot more development time,
effort and expense.
I wonder if Apple has thought about what they're trying to destroy!!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Litigates Patents aren't vague, the are broad and their breadth make them valuable
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 22 2013 @ 10:10 AM EDT
The following:

"Red Hat says, adding that after a lot of experience dealing with
litigation, it has come to believe that litigants specifically choose poor
quality patents to use, precisely because they are so vague:"

in the vernacular of many middle schools back in the day, would have been
responded to with "No duuuuh".


Those patents are not vague, they are broad. They were written broadly because
the inventors believed they had invented something that could be implemented a
great many ways. Therefore, the claims were written broadly to encompass
everything that had been invented. Those claims were examined and the patent
office agreed that no one else had ever made anything covered by the broad
claims before.

Narrow claims don't get litigated because they are easy to work around, so
infringers work around them rather than infringe.

Patent applications with narrow claims don't usually get filed, because such
patents are not worth the effort needed to go through the application process or
the enforcement process.

[ Reply to This | # ]

USPTO seems to not even follow the Supreme Court's rulings, are they really gonna listen to us?
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 22 2013 @ 10:10 AM EDT
USPTO seems to not even follow the Supreme Court's rulings, are they really
gonna listen to us?

Software is Math, period.

No Patents allowed.

[ Reply to This | # ]

hold patent examiners responsible for their work
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 22 2013 @ 01:22 PM EDT
How about valid parents must have the examiner's signature
under their social security number, and they must be liable
under civil and criminal law for the damage they do.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Comments to USPTO on How to Improve Patent Applications: Red Hat's & Morrison & Foerster's ~pj
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 22 2013 @ 01:47 PM EDT
I'd be interested in seeing a patent examiner that is thinking of granting a
patent on software build it themselves based on the patent application only,
without help from the "inventor" or his lawyer.

I'd bet that in more than half the cases they would be unable to do it. A
patent examiner should be able to do it quite easily as they should, on average,
be more skilled than a Person Having Ordinary Skill In The Art.

j

[ Reply to This | # ]

Thanks - A very interesting read
Authored by: seanlynch on Monday, April 22 2013 @ 06:13 PM EDT
This was quite a lot to take in at once. Took a few sittings to get through it
all.

There are some very intelligent people arguing for the open side.

It makes me feel confident the ideas and message are getting through.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Patent Dictionaries
Authored by: davecb on Tuesday, April 23 2013 @ 10:15 AM EDT
Pubpat released a set of claims constructions glossaries, linked to from here as
http://www.pubpat.org/garrodglossariesreleased.htm

Is this a good starting-point for a "common, controlled vocabulary"
for patents?

--dave

---
davecb@spamcop.net

[ Reply to This | # ]

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 )