I just started (again) to read Patrick Anderson’s great blog – GametimeIP. Anderson is president of PatentCalls, and his blog focuses on the business of patents and intellectual property management issues. Recent posts include a comparison of RPX versus ICAP’s Covenant-Not-to-Sue Auction; a rip on a “patently clueless law firm“; a discussion of the most recent patent lawsuits stemming from Intellectual Ventures; and the post “Did A Banking Lobbyist Just Admit To Buying Its Own Section Of Patent Reform?“
I needed to use a language that Malcolm could understand…
Now where is my response regarding “harmonization”?
Finjan Inc. v. Secure Computing (Fed. Cir. 2010).
I don’t recall much discussion about this pile o’ .
Oh, THAT preemption doctrine. I thought you were referring to the Supremacy Clause. That’s what I get for going to law school. 🙂
I’ve read your discusson over on Patrick’s board. He’s a little over the top about the impact of Cybersource, but I have to say I also struggle to understand how a computerized process remains a mental process. I think the court’s result is probably right, but maybe we’re missing some steps in the analysis?
Want to buy a bridge?
Hyper Text Language of Markup, perhaps? Maybe it’s French?
The preemption doctrine is what the court is using to exclude mental processes. That is how it is relevant.
I’ve shared it with you guys many a times over here Leo.
And with that, this blog has had it’s Recommended Daily Dosage of irony.
But, remember, Rich Boss, Moonley believes a piece of a brain is patentable (cutting big things into small things – a piece of DNA, a brain, a stick, etc.).
What’s stranger still, though, is ten posts up Moonley admitted a COMPUTER BRAIN is patentable!!!! Lolz – now I have seen everything!
Hereyago
” IBM says it has created a chip that imitates the brain’s ability . . .
Sounds like a real invention.”
(NJ, NY, US Patent Office)
Where can I apply nowadays for a New York or New Jersey patent?
Now that’s funny.
I’m looking forward to your explanation of the preemption doctrine, 6. I hope you will share it with us. I’m curious, though, how is it relevant to the post you cited?
I was thinking these same things as I read this article yesterday. You know the media has to dumb things down a bit for the masses. When it comes to IBM’s claims, I’ve seen the whole spectrum, from airplane restroom waiting ticket technology to some very advanced and particularly claimed systems. Not sure what we’ll get this time around, or even what dictates the quality of their claims.
The claims will need to recite much, much more detail. [repeat three times for good measure and then misstate context of what object’s past is being departed from]
Really? Or perhaps the specification, that enables claims…
T O O L
“Brains are older than computers…”
Too bad yours is MIA most of the time. Now stop playing on the computer and get back to work.
“Imagine traffic lights that can integrate sights, sounds and smells and flag unsafe intersections before disaster happens,” said Dharmendra Modha, the project leader for IBM Research. “Or imagine cognitive co-processors that turn servers, laptops, tablets and phones into machines that can interact better with their environments.”
All those things have been imagined already. Many, many years ago, in fact. The claims will need to recite much, much more detail.
Other scenarios the researchers envision: A computing system that could monitor the world’s water supply — measuring things like temperature, pressure, wave height and acoustics — then give a warning when it thinks a tsunami is likely.
Sounds great. Of course, the claim can’t look anything like that (although a great many software claims look exactly like that).
Or imagine a sensor that a grocery store owner could use to read sights, smells and temperatures and give an alert that produce may have gone bad.
We call them “grocery store employees.” Again, the claim will have to recite much, much more than that.
“The computers we have today are more like calculators,” Modha told tech blog VentureBeat. “We want to make something like the brain. It is a sharp departure from the past.”
Something that is like a brain is a sharp departure from the past? LOL. Brains are older than computers.
Making computers behave like humans has taken another step forward. IBM says it has created a chip that imitates the brain’s ability to understand its surroundings, take action and make sense of complex data.
link to cnn.com
Sounds like a real invention. Will they claim it like one?
Putting a random comma in the middle, of your sentence might also be worse than being censured by the government.
Congratulations Mooney,
You successfully closed your HTLM tags this time. A burgeoning career in web development awaits you since this patent thing clearly isn’t working out for you…
Anderson is president of PatentCalls and His blog focuses on the business of patents and intellectual property management issues.
Putting a random comma in the middle, of your sentence might also be worse than being censured by the government.
Getting an article on here about how bad your company is, might be worse than being censured by the government…
Anderson is president of PatentCalls
Hence the shilling.
Apparently my couple of comments a few days ago on his site have caused a relative explosion in popularity. lulz
He also has a post on the recent Cyber decision.
link to gametimeip.com
Also note that it looks like I’m going to have to explain the preemption doctrine to the good lawlyer since he apparently does not understand it.
Comments are closed.