|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 29 2013 @ 04:56 PM EDT |
You should put on your hip waders when you read it. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: PJ on Friday, March 29 2013 @ 05:45 PM EDT |
Say, while I appreciate all effort, I'm wondering
about a couple of things. One, if you are not a
lawyer, be sure to ay so.
Second, is there a way to write shorter comments?
Maybe break up the thoughts a bit more, so people
don't have to scroll? Maybe you could have one
comment with additional thoughts as replies beneath
it? Would that work?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: macliam on Friday, March 29 2013 @ 06:52 PM EDT |
. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 29 2013 @ 10:44 PM EDT |
The following definitions are relevant:
Section
100(a): “The term ‘invention’ means invention or discovery.”
Section
100(b): “The term ‘process’ means process, art, or method, and includes a new
use of a known process, machine, manufacture, composition of matter, or
material.
They may be relevant but so far as definitions go,
they are self-referential nonsense.
A 'farble' is a farble or
discovery. Uhuh, so what's a farble?
A 'gerkle' is a gerkle,
machine, manufacture, composition of matter, or material. Erm, yeah. So
what's a gerkle?
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: macliam on Saturday, March 30 2013 @ 07:08 AM EDT |
The corrected URL for the document Statutory Interpretation: General
Principles and Recent Trends is
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mis
c/97-589.pdf
The link in the FIRST DRAFT document had an
http://groklawstatic.ibiblio.org prepended, making it unfollowable. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|