|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 21 2013 @ 04:01 PM EDT |
It's called manipulation - my interpretation. In the case you describe it's
where people of authority overextend their authority. If done deliberately then
- again, my humble opinion - it's clear abuse of authority.
From the
perspective of what was outlined:
That could be done inadvertently - the
Federal Circuit really didn't understand and figured as long as the Supremes
didn't speak up, they're doing ok.
or
That can be done deliberately -
as you outlined.
If deliberate, then:
Quinn is still not a Lawyer I
ever want representing me. He's willing to deliberately bend (break?) the Law
as long as he can get away with it.
If I've got a reasonable case, then I
want to win on the facts and the Law. If I don't have a reasonable case, I want
the Lawyer to tell me that. That is in my best interest. My best interest does
not lie in paying a Lawyer to argue an extreme position on the off-chance the
Jury can be persuaded I have a case when I don't. I - pesonally - hold great
value in earning an honest dollar.
If inadvertent:
Then now's the
time for Mr. Quinn to acknowledge such things as "math isn't patentable" and "a
process wherein you apply a math algorithm to a calculator is not
patentable".
Will he? Or will he stick to his historical pattern and pull
out a patent granted on math as proof that math is patentable even while the
Supremes keep clearly saying otherwise?
Interesting questions.
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 21 2013 @ 04:05 PM EDT |
If you are going to defer to an authority on the Law in order to better
understand the Law... and two authorities disagree.... which authority do you
defer to:
A Practicing Patent Lawer
or
Supreme Court
Judges
??
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: PolR on Friday, June 21 2013 @ 05:17 PM EDT |
| I hear you RAS.
This is a different issue than being unaware of the
law.
The Supreme Court is not sitting beside every judge's bench watching
over their shoulder. Very few cases make it up to the Supreme Court. But every
patent appeal goes to the Federal Circuit and this is where most binding
precedents come from.
From a practical perspective, case law comes from the
Federal Circuit with an occasional guidance from the Supreme Court. This has
turned into a playground for patent extremists. Patent attorneys are taking that
into consideration and advice their clients accordingly. It is their job to do
so.
For more an this issue, see the news pick Chief Judge Markey
and Doctrinal Development.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- While true.... - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 21 2013 @ 06:17 PM EDT
|
|
|
|
