|
Authored by: Ian Al on Monday, April 08 2013 @ 11:02 AM EDT |
.
---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid![ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: alisonken1 on Monday, April 08 2013 @ 01:47 PM EDT |
Think of the description as an executive summary. In legal
circles, the only thing that matters is the specific claim(s)
that the patent covers, not the "executive summary"
(otherwise known as market speak).
---
- Ken -
import std_disclaimer.py
Registered John Doe^W^WLinux user #296561
Slackin' since 1993
http://www.slackware.com[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 08 2013 @ 02:56 PM EDT |
In the sense you describe, the specification does matter. The claimed subject
matter must support the claims. That is, the specification must explain how to
make and use the invention so that one of ordinary skill could make and use the
claimed invention without undue experimentation.
However, the specification can talk about a range of four legged creatures to
provide background and context, while the claims are directed specifically to
cats.
So, if you want to show that a patent is not valid over the prior art, you need
to look at the claims. If they claim cats, its best to find prior art that
describes cats. Dog art might be useful if you have a strong argument that cats
are obvious in view of dogs...but cats are different enough from dogs that such
an argument would probably not convince a jury.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|