I am a law student and recently passed the US patent exam. I have yet to get my registration number, but I am obviously excited. I am now taking my first courses in IP law and am writing my law review on, you guessed it, the Patent Reform Act of 2005.
That being said, I obviously have nowhere near the education and experience in this field that you do. I respect your professional opinion. I hope you have had a fullfilling career and that you enjoy your retirement.
While these words are independent and not expressly tied to the old sections, the fact that the same words are being used would normally mean a court would interpret them the same way. Such is the intertexual argument. The committee is still arguing over the wording and details, so maybe when the committee report is released, we will have some idea what the intent is. Intent, as you know, is the main tool for legal interpretation in statutory cases. If the committee report says these words mean something else, that will be a strong influence.
As a soon-to-be Patent Agent and budding Patent Attorney, I am very optimistic about these changes and what they mean to the patent law. It's interesting in particular that you as a retiring attorney are skeptical and I as a starting soon-to-be attorney am optimistic. Perhaps this is linked to my lack of experience, or perhaps to the cliche youthful idealism that is supposed to be crushed out of me at some point in the future.
As for your hypothetical regarding the Linux OS, I think that since the Linux OS is obviously enabling (it works) that it will continue to count as prior art, and even the deep, dark parts of the core would be considered avaliable to one of ordinary skill in the art. I could be wrong of course. With the opposition proceedures being created, a lot more of these issues will be litigated before the USPTO then the CAFC. However, all new laws are always tested by lawyers seeking to leverage the unknown of a new law to the clients advantage. That's the way the profession works (or so it appears). These leverage attempts however do not discourage me, as I think that the interpretations of the new provisions will be consistent with the current interpretations.
As for your comment:
'The more words there are, the more words there are about which doubts may be entertained'. Where there are more doubts, there are certainly more opportunities for expensive legal arguments, and the party without the long purse will be still further disadvantaged
You are certainly correct. One thing Congress has managed to do well is to greatly expand the number of words in the patent law and the copyright law. What is it now, like 3 times the length or something? Money has always been an issue in law. At the same time, the USPTO proceedures should be cheaper then the federal courts, so maybe that will help the little guy a little. But, money does matter, which is why it is nice to have IBM et al on the "good side" at the moment:)
I disagree with your interpretation of the meaning of the provisions you are citing. However, I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
--- that pre-existing subject matter will only count as prior art against a patent if it is "reasonably and effectively accessible", and also
--- that pre-existing subject-matter won't count as reasonably accessible nor as prior art unless skilled persons can 'gain access' to it 'without resort to undue efforts',
--- and it also won't count as 'effectively' accessible unless 'persons of ordinary skill' are able to 'comprehend the content of the subject matter without resort to undue efforts' (see page 4 of 'coalition print').
In current patent law, the #1 most important thing is Enablement. From 35 USC 112,first paragraph:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Thus, a patent MUST provide 1) written description, 2) Enablement, 3) Best Mode. Best mode is about to go away under the reform act, but Enablement isn't going anywhere.
Enablement is the basic quid pro quo of patent law. We give you a monopoly for 20 years, but only if you disclose the invetion. The invention is required to be disclosed such that a "person of ordinary skill in the art" can pratice (make) the invention.
The provisions you cited, and I quoted above seem totally consistent with this standard, and consistent with the prior patent law. Prior art has a more narrow definition in patent law then in common usage. If the prior art is not enabling, it really doesn't count under the current law anyway. Prior art must either be under 35 USC 102 (called an "anticipation" , that is, that there is prior art somewhere that is exactly the same as the patent the person they are trying to get) or 35 USC 103 (for "obvious" inventions. Either multiple references from 35 USC 102 are combined to make the invention [instead of just one] or the patent application is an "obvious" derivitave of what is already in the prior art).
"Reasonably accessible" and "undue efforts" are about disclosure. "Persons of ordinary skill" is the standard that now exists and has plenty of case law making clear what this means, and is not as ambigous a term as you suggest. "Comprehend the content of the subject matter without resort to undue efforts" is about enablement.
These changes are consistent with the current law IMHO.
This is making major MAJOR changes to patent law (prior use rights, first to file instead of first to invent, creation of public opposition proceedings, publication of all patents, etc, etc, etc.) in 10 or 12 MAJOR areas of patent law.
And this thing is going to pass. It has wide congressional bipartisan support and the support of the all the major players. And it is a good thing for consumers.
I see that we are now on stage 22 of the apple product lifecycle, to wit:
The obligatory "I'm waiting for Rev. B" discussion appears in the Mac forums. People who've been burned by first-generation Apple products open up their old wounds and bleed their tales of woe. Unsympathetic technophiles fire back with, "if you can't handle the heat, stay out of the kitchen. pussy." Everyone has this stupid argument for the twenty-third time.
Could you please respond to the review located at http://planetmagrathea.com/shortreview.html , in particular rebutting the parts that suggest the movie is poor in quality, is a travisty, or is otherwise unworthy of the name HHGTTG?
By this logic, there is no need for impartial judges in the court system. We should just allow the victim to pronounce what sentence is warrented by the crime.
We need impartial people to make the ethical standards, because in the moment, it's pretty tough to do what is right over what is immediatly expediant.
It doesn't matter if you have facts to back up an assertion like that, you're still going to pay a price in suffering that makes it far better to just shut the hell up.
That sounds like a pretty dangerous argument. I suspect the same sentence could be used to justify oppression of many kinds.
E.G. "It doesn't matter if you have facts to back up an assertion like [ the Earth revolves around the Sun | Capitalism is the best economic model | Evolution is a correct model | Deficit spending is bad ] , you're still going to pay a price in suffering that makes it far better to just shut the hell up."
I am not saying the underlying statement is true. I don't know if it is true or false. But a university, above all institutions, has a primary purpose of discovering and teaching truth. It is pretty dangerous stuff when we from government or self-imposed censorship we prevent "truth" from being determined.
As for the "truth" of the statement, the market place of ideas operates on all ideas being available for discussion. For discussion on why we should allow people to express ideas that are in part false or perhaps all false, see "Of the liberty of Thought and Discussion", but John Stewart Mill. Here is a link.
Yes, I suppose I am a bad sport. But, I didn't ask to play. You tricked me. And the news media. I am sure they have some sort of claim based on the value of the page that was taken up from your fake story. I wonder how much the column inches you consumed would have been worth in ad revenue or in the printing of valid news.
He should consult with a lawyer. Selling the land seems like a bad idea. Let's structure a nice leasehold instead, like a term of years for short periods. I would also be curious about possible sovereignty issue ramifications.
Try the premium Pur brand
on
Hacking Vodka
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
They should try it with the premium Brita Pur filters, not just the regular Brtia kind. Those are supposed to get out even more bad stuff, and perhaps in less passes? Maybe a three way test: Brita v. Regular Pur v. Super Pur.
Simply not true per my understanding. If property is ruled as "abandoned", the original title is erased. Distinguishing between property that is "lost", "misplaced", and "abandoned" is of course a more tricky analysis.
IANAL either, but my law classes suggest he might be able to keep the photos too. The taking of the photos gave a first posession right. He "lost" the photos. I don't think they have been long lost enought to erase the original title, but as for the relative title, I think there is a good claim for the finder.
If the orignial owner shows up now and wants there photos and memory stick back, then I think he has to give both back. 1 year isn't long enough to destroy the original title. But until they do show up, I see no obvious problems with posting the photos. He will have to take them down though if the original owner can be found and desires it.
>> The thing about being the biggest/largest/tallest/longest etc of something, is that you only keep the title as long as nothing else comes along and surpasses you.
I think the difference is that neither Microsoft, nor the MPAA, and not even the RIAA is totally evil or without their good side. In decreasing order of likelyhood, they all occasionally redeem their overall negative reputation by doing something really cool, innovative, original, new, fair, inspiring, and dare I even say "good" (in the sense of right / wrong).
However such technology doesn't offer the descretion that say a police officer or judge has in determining the guilt in say exceeding the speed limit. What if you are speeding because you are trying to get a dying relative to a hospital or something? The law says that you are speeding, a police officer can determine that perhaps you actually need some help not be punished with a fine.
Hmmm...the police can determine you need help and not issue you a ticket you say? Yeah, I guess that makes sense. I mean, when would the police ever issue you a ticket instead of giving you help when it is clearly needed and it is a pressing emergency?
Is there a good place to see a comparison between Debian and Gentoo? I am curious as to the advantages / disadvantages between the systems. I want to give the switch to Linux another try, and given that both systems are very popular with the slashdot crowd, I was wondering if there was anyone who could help me compare / contrast. I am particularlly interested in reviews on which distributions make playing all types of media files as painless as possible.
Slashdot Mirror
Also, not to put too fine a point on it, can you get me an IP summer intern job? Know anyone hiring? :)
I am a law student and recently passed the US patent exam. I have yet to get my registration number, but I am obviously excited. I am now taking my first courses in IP law and am writing my law review on, you guessed it, the Patent Reform Act of 2005.
That being said, I obviously have nowhere near the education and experience in this field that you do. I respect your professional opinion. I hope you have had a fullfilling career and that you enjoy your retirement.
While these words are independent and not expressly tied to the old sections, the fact that the same words are being used would normally mean a court would interpret them the same way. Such is the intertexual argument. The committee is still arguing over the wording and details, so maybe when the committee report is released, we will have some idea what the intent is. Intent, as you know, is the main tool for legal interpretation in statutory cases. If the committee report says these words mean something else, that will be a strong influence.
As a soon-to-be Patent Agent and budding Patent Attorney, I am very optimistic about these changes and what they mean to the patent law. It's interesting in particular that you as a retiring attorney are skeptical and I as a starting soon-to-be attorney am optimistic. Perhaps this is linked to my lack of experience, or perhaps to the cliche youthful idealism that is supposed to be crushed out of me at some point in the future.
As for your hypothetical regarding the Linux OS, I think that since the Linux OS is obviously enabling (it works) that it will continue to count as prior art, and even the deep, dark parts of the core would be considered avaliable to one of ordinary skill in the art. I could be wrong of course. With the opposition proceedures being created, a lot more of these issues will be litigated before the USPTO then the CAFC. However, all new laws are always tested by lawyers seeking to leverage the unknown of a new law to the clients advantage. That's the way the profession works (or so it appears). These leverage attempts however do not discourage me, as I think that the interpretations of the new provisions will be consistent with the current interpretations.
As for your comment:
You are certainly correct. One thing Congress has managed to do well is to greatly expand the number of words in the patent law and the copyright law. What is it now, like 3 times the length or something? Money has always been an issue in law. At the same time, the USPTO proceedures should be cheaper then the federal courts, so maybe that will help the little guy a little. But, money does matter, which is why it is nice to have IBM et al on the "good side" at the moment
In current patent law, the #1 most important thing is Enablement. From 35 USC 112,first paragraph:
Thus, a patent MUST provide 1) written description, 2) Enablement, 3) Best Mode. Best mode is about to go away under the reform act, but Enablement isn't going anywhere.
Enablement is the basic quid pro quo of patent law. We give you a monopoly for 20 years, but only if you disclose the invetion. The invention is required to be disclosed such that a "person of ordinary skill in the art" can pratice (make) the invention.
The provisions you cited, and I quoted above seem totally consistent with this standard, and consistent with the prior patent law. Prior art has a more narrow definition in patent law then in common usage. If the prior art is not enabling, it really doesn't count under the current law anyway. Prior art must either be under 35 USC 102 (called an "anticipation" , that is, that there is prior art somewhere that is exactly the same as the patent the person they are trying to get) or 35 USC 103 (for "obvious" inventions. Either multiple references from 35 USC 102 are combined to make the invention [instead of just one] or the patent application is an "obvious" derivitave of what is already in the prior art).
"Reasonably accessible" and "undue efforts" are about disclosure. "Persons of ordinary skill" is the standard that now exists and has plenty of case law making clear what this means, and is not as ambigous a term as you suggest. "Comprehend the content of the subject matter without resort to undue efforts" is about enablement.
These changes are consistent with the current law IMHO.
Are you serious???? Have you not heard of the Patent Reform Act of 2005, H.R. 2795 ?
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:h.r.
http://www.ipo.org/template.cfm?Section=Patent_Re
This is making major MAJOR changes to patent law (prior use rights, first to file instead of first to invent, creation of public opposition proceedings, publication of all patents, etc, etc, etc.) in 10 or 12 MAJOR areas of patent law.
And this thing is going to pass. It has wide congressional bipartisan support and the support of the all the major players. And it is a good thing for consumers.
Yikes, get your facts straight.
http://www.misterbg.org/AppleProductCycle/
As a matter of fact, I never did this.
I am 24 now and have enjoyed drinking these past three years. Before then, I followed the rules.
Please don't make such absolute statements.
Could you please respond to the review located at http://planetmagrathea.com/shortreview.html , in particular rebutting the parts that suggest the movie is poor in quality, is a travisty, or is otherwise unworthy of the name HHGTTG?
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
Oy! That was a good one!
Where do the editors come up with these wonders?
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
So you'd be pissed to be someone's twin?
There seem to be a lot of those around. Seems to be working out ok so far.
By this logic, there is no need for impartial judges in the court system. We should just allow the victim to pronounce what sentence is warrented by the crime.
We need impartial people to make the ethical standards, because in the moment, it's pretty tough to do what is right over what is immediatly expediant.
It doesn't matter if you have facts to back up an assertion like that, you're still going to pay a price in suffering that makes it far better to just shut the hell up.
That sounds like a pretty dangerous argument. I suspect the same sentence could be used to justify oppression of many kinds.
E.G. "It doesn't matter if you have facts to back up an assertion like [ the Earth revolves around the Sun | Capitalism is the best economic model | Evolution is a correct model | Deficit spending is bad ] , you're still going to pay a price in suffering that makes it far better to just shut the hell up."
I am not saying the underlying statement is true. I don't know if it is true or false. But a university, above all institutions, has a primary purpose of discovering and teaching truth. It is pretty dangerous stuff when we from government or self-imposed censorship we prevent "truth" from being determined.
As for the "truth" of the statement, the market place of ideas operates on all ideas being available for discussion. For discussion on why we should allow people to express ideas that are in part false or perhaps all false, see "Of the liberty of Thought and Discussion", but John Stewart Mill. Here is a link.
http://www.bartleby.com/130/2.html
In all seriousness, I hope someone sues you.
Yes, I suppose I am a bad sport. But, I didn't ask to play. You tricked me. And the news media. I am sure they have some sort of claim based on the value of the page that was taken up from your fake story. I wonder how much the column inches you consumed would have been worth in ad revenue or in the printing of valid news.
Again, hope you get sued. Merry christmas.
He should consult with a lawyer. Selling the land seems like a bad idea. Let's structure a nice leasehold instead, like a term of years for short periods. I would also be curious about possible sovereignty issue ramifications.
They should try it with the premium Brita Pur filters, not just the regular Brtia kind. Those are supposed to get out even more bad stuff, and perhaps in less passes? Maybe a three way test: Brita v. Regular Pur v. Super Pur.
l
http://www.purwater.com/yourwater/pitchers.shtm
For a long time
The American Bar Association's Model Rules of Professional Conduct
http://www.abanet.org/cpr/mrpc/mrpc_toc.html
I don't feel like committing purjury, and I seem to recall that my signature is considered under oath on a absentee request form.
Ohio doesn't have early voting.
Simply not true per my understanding. If property is ruled as "abandoned", the original title is erased. Distinguishing between property that is "lost", "misplaced", and "abandoned" is of course a more tricky analysis.
*IANAL
IANAL either, but my law classes suggest he might be able to keep the photos too. The taking of the photos gave a first posession right. He "lost" the photos. I don't think they have been long lost enought to erase the original title, but as for the relative title, I think there is a good claim for the finder.
If the orignial owner shows up now and wants there photos and memory stick back, then I think he has to give both back. 1 year isn't long enough to destroy the original title. But until they do show up, I see no obvious problems with posting the photos. He will have to take them down though if the original owner can be found and desires it.
*IANAL, this is not legal advice.
Perhaps you can post some links to the different ones you have used and let us know pros / cons where they exist.
Is it sad to this day I get slightly sad whenever I read this quote?
The Whale was unable to be friends with the ground! All it wanted was to be happy and liked!
>> The thing about being the biggest/largest/tallest/longest etc of something, is that you only keep the title as long as nothing else comes along and surpasses you.
>Not in Texas...
Um, how about Alaska?
I think the difference is that neither Microsoft, nor the MPAA, and not even the RIAA is totally evil or without their good side. In decreasing order of likelyhood, they all occasionally redeem their overall negative reputation by doing something really cool, innovative, original, new, fair, inspiring, and dare I even say "good" (in the sense of right / wrong) .
However, SCO is totally evil, and can do no good.
Hmmm...the police can determine you need help and not issue you a ticket you say? Yeah, I guess that makes sense. I mean, when would the police ever issue you a ticket instead of giving you help when it is clearly needed and it is a pressing emergency?
http://www.nbc13.com/family/3596912/detail.html
Oh... nevermind.
"There's no exception to the rule." Yeah, that's great.
Is there a good place to see a comparison between Debian and Gentoo? I am curious as to the advantages / disadvantages between the systems. I want to give the switch to Linux another try, and given that both systems are very popular with the slashdot crowd, I was wondering if there was anyone who could help me compare / contrast. I am particularlly interested in reviews on which distributions make playing all types of media files as painless as possible.
Thanks.