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
Sorry - no go | 211 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Sorry - no go
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
I'm not sure what to make of this. I do believe you're serious.
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 | # ]

Umh - that's the first complaint I have heard of...
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 | # ]

It dawns on me that....
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 | # ]

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 )