|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 11 2012 @ 12:50 PM EDT |
I think the answer is in your question,
And it is implied in Professor Risch's article:
Working (un-obfuscated) proof-of-concept source code.
Easy to check against the claims, easy to invalidate (especially if you have the
source code to a prior patent)
And best yet, if it is a good patent, you have a reference implementation, that
actually teaches the invention.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: mrisch on Monday, June 11 2012 @ 03:43 PM EDT |
These are good points. There is an argument that early
hostility to software is the cause of all these problems. One
theory is that if we had allowed software openly from the time
of Benson, then we would have much more prior art. Indeed, I
think that the explosion will cause fewer software patents in
the future, due to more prior art being available.
You can still do patent class searching, and people still do
it. Note that it is the examiner that does the searching.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|