Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 29 2013 @ 03:53 PM EDT |
The extreme (I hope) abuse being displayed is only a measure of the
individual.
It's not an indication for any of:
the
validity/invalidity of the particular patent
the quantity of good/bad
patents being granted
the difficulty associated with getting a patent
granted
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- So, its your position... - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 29 2013 @ 05:03 PM EDT
- Nope - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 29 2013 @ 06:38 PM EDT
|
Authored by: artp on Monday, April 29 2013 @ 10:48 PM EDT |
1. You forgot the sarcasm tags. Look at the [rising]
approval rates of patent applications to 89%.
2. The attorney had it right when he said: "When in doubt,
reject right?" That is, there needs to be an established
reason to approve. He shoulda stopped while he was behind.
But then he goes on to shoot off both feet, both ears, his
nose and various other appendages that iBiblio will not let
me name.
3. madingly -> maddeningly
---
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 | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Gringo_ on Monday, April 29 2013 @ 10:55 PM EDT |
Seems to me that if the patent office was doing its job
screening out all
the overly broad and obvious patents, we
would have heard a steady stream of
grumbling, and
expressions of exasperation would be a common
occurrence.
The number of vague and obvious patents we read about on
nearly a daily bases and the total absence of grumbling from
patent lawyers
confirms that they are who the PTO caters to.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 30 2013 @ 12:39 PM EDT |
... the patent in question, the Patent Lawyer who filed for the patent and
the comment indicating "it's difficult to get a patent, here's proof, the guy
filing was abusive and was only abusive because it's hard" are all evidence of
one of the big problems that cause the patent system to fail:
The inability
of the Patent Lawyer to accept when the patent is properly rejected!
Not
all Patent Lawyers are afflicted by this of course. But too many apparently
hold the perspective that no patent should ever be rejected... even when it's a
clear patent on math1 or on something that already
exists2.
1) The Supremes keep saying math is not patentable
subject matter - when will all Patent Lawyers finally accept that and stop
trying to deliberately patent math under other guises. Probably only when they
start being properly punished for the improper filings. No, rejecting the
patent is not a proper punishment. A proper punishment is a deterrent and a
rejection is obviously not a detterent given how many refilings/appeals/etc. are
done.
2) An anon that I suspect was a Patent Attorney once said that
"even though the wheel was known the world over, if someone grew up in a
backwater area where they were never exposed to the wheel, and they invented it
today, they deserve a patent". Yes, you read that right. A Patent Attorney
suggested that the world owes an "inventor" who invented the wheel today even
though the wheel has been in use for thousands of years.
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|