Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

[News] Patent Trolls Having a Day Trip While USPTO is Broken

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Paper Catalog + Computer Database = Patent? Um, No.

,----[ Quote ]
| So just what is this wonderful sales method? In a nutshell, the patent claims 
| ownership over the idea of finding out what a customer wants, electronically 
| finding out what you have that matches that customer's needs, electronically 
| collecting information about the stuff you have to offer the customer, and 
| putting that information into a pitch to the customer.    
`----

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/07/paper-catalog-computer-database-patent-um-no

Personalization Patent Goes Up for Auction on eBay

,----[ Quote ]
| Investors will have the opportunity to acquire the patent on a revolutionary 
| personalization system that is set to go to auction in September.
`----

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2008/7/prweb1160864.htm

Another junk patent that takes the brain of a 7-year-old.


Recent:

The Death of Google's Patents

,----[ Quote ]
| The Patent and Trademark Office has now made clear that its newly developed
| position on patentable subject matter will invalidate many and perhaps most
| software patents, including pioneering patent claims to such innovators as
| Google, Inc.
|
| [...]
|
| The logic of the PTO’s positions in Nuijten, Comiskey and Bilski has always
| threatened to destabilize whole fields of patenting, most especially in the
| field of software patents. If the PTO’s test is followed, the crucial
| question for the vitality of patents on computer implemented inventions is
| whether a general purpose computer qualifies as a “particular” machine within
| the meaning of the agency’s test. In two recent decisions announced after the
| oral arguments in the Bilski case, Ex parte Langemyr (May 28, 2008) and Ex
| parte Wasynczuk (June 2, 2008), the PTO Board of Patent Appeals and
| Interferences has now supplied an answer to that question: A general purpose
| computer is not a particular machine, and thus innovative software processes
| are unpatentable if they are tied only to a general purpose computer.
`----

http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2008/07/the-death-of-go.html
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkiQpR4ACgkQU4xAY3RXLo43yQCfSZdQguycI+ijH/quA/ZurSg2
YDYAoIabgf8o1vPTvKLtbs4bn6TAYg2M
=1KNf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index