decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
I think you're being too harsh | 457 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Small improvements justify small license fees
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 07 2013 @ 11:59 AM EDT
Significance is in the eye of the beholder and not a word used in 35 USC 101.

If the invention is insignificant, don't use it.

If it must be used, it must be significant. Pay the fee.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

I think you're being too harsh
Authored by: Wol on Friday, June 07 2013 @ 03:58 PM EDT
If I make a small improvement, why shouldn't I patent it?

The problem is not me patenting my improvement. The problem is couching my
improvement in vague terms that can then be used to harass the people who were
there before me.

ONCE AGAIN we need an example! The inventor must HAVE TO show the court his
invention. At which point the Judge is likely to either (a) laugh at my
improvement or (b) ask "and how does my competitor's product actually
infringe?". (And in the latter case, the Judge should probably also (c) say
"attorney fees awarded to the defendant!")

Cheers,
Wol

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )