|
Authored by: PolR on Saturday, February 02 2013 @ 11:11 AM EST |
This is not about patent eligibility. This is about functional claiming and the
interpretation of section 112(f) of patent law. Legally this issue is very
different from patent eligibility. See the Lemley article at the link in this
proposed response. The USPTO is clearly considering to adopt his views and has
engaged consultations on this topic.
Also trolls and NPE are not a distraction. The word 'troll' is used by Lemley
himself in his article. Curbing the problems caused by trolls is an explicit
goal of his proposed interpretation of 112(f). We answer that this proposal is
not sufficient because trolls can also use patents on abstract ideas. This
remark is on-topic and we need to use the word 'troll' because this is the word
Lemley is using.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|