People setting out to analyse particular issues in depth will approach the
subject matter from different angles, with different biases and analytical
frameworks, and with different background knowledge. Such is the nature of
scholarship. The issues under discussion here with all their ramifications have
a complexity that clearly has the capacity to baffle and confuse appelate
judges. (Of course the patent bar considers that the Supreme Court justices are
hopelessly "confused" about patent law, whereas many readers here
might think that such confusion is more evident amongst some of the circuit
judges on the Federal Circuit.)
Ideally, I suggest that it would be
useful to foster regular discussion on Groklaw on general principles of
patent-eligibility and patent-validity and other issues of patent law, over the
coming years. And I suggest that it would help us to 'grok' patent law if some
chosen cases involving patent litigation (e.g., the next round of Apple v.
Samsung before Judge Koh) were followed in depth, so that members can
address the issues from their own perspectives, so that, if the time comes when
Groklaw thinks it appropriate to submit an amicus curiae brief to
the Supreme Court or Federal Circuit, the groundwork would have been laid for a
brief that might catch the attention of the Supreme Court justices who have
developed views on patent law.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|