Patentlyo Bits and Bytes by Anthony McCain

Get a Job doing Patent Law                  

Anthony McCain

About Anthony McCain

Anthony McCain is a law student at Mizzou where he is focusing on intellectual property; He has a background in mechanical engineering. anthony.mccain@patentlyo.com

27 thoughts on “Patentlyo Bits and Bytes by Anthony McCain

  1. Re: An Examiner’s Tips…

    More like this but I notice the examiner is concerned about “time we spend fixing section 112 issues.” I think few applicants anticipate 112 issues. Could some other Examiners elaborate?

  2. link to theguardian.com

    Uber began piloting its self-driving vehicles in its home town of San Francisco last week, despite state officials’ declaration that the ride-share company needed special permits to test its technology. On day one, numerous autonomous vehicles – which have a driver in the front seat who can take control – were caught running red lights and committing a range of traffic violations.

    Despite threats of legal action from the department of motor vehicles (DMV) and California’s attorney general, Kamala Harris, Uber refused to back down on Friday, claiming its rejection of government authority was “an important issue of principle”.

    ROTLMAO

    Yes, some innocent people who have nothing to do with Uber will probably die. But it’s all for a great cause, i.e., making Uber’s investors as rich as possible as fast as possible.

    Where have we heard this awesome story before? And just think: in just a few years we’ll have robot judges and robot juries sentencing to death. Thank goodness that software isn’t logic! Otherwise we might blame the “app developers” who are the most important who ever lived.

    LOLOLOL

    1. MM, I see. UBER does not have to a right to do what it believes is legal?

      The idea that a government bureaucrat can shut down one’s business on his own authority without the right of the company to a day is court is to me the real problem here.

      1. Oh there will be days in court. How much is a human life worth? Uber will happily pay. It’s a cost of it’s awesome business, which nobody can live without. Nobody who matters, anyway.

          1. Or I can take the train, drive my own car, or borrow a friends, or walk, or ride my bike, or take a bus or even a cab.

            But support Uber? No thanks. Just about as cr@ppy as Farcebook. I’ll avoid until it fades away and then toast the demise. Do you know wat both companies have in common?

            1. You are in for a good long wait MM. Facebook is bedrock. Uber is a regular habit of lots and lots of upscale people.

              Best quote from the Fortune article about TC Heartland:

              “In an interview with Fortune, Kline also said it is likely the Supreme Court will change the venue rules, partly because it decided to hear the case in the first place, and because it regularly overturns the appeals court in question“.

                1. Not sure why you are LOLing, as if I take more than one of your options, they simply fail to address the point to which the options are offered.

                  Seems like a no brained that such fails.

      2. The idea that a government bureaucrat can shut down one’s business on his own authority without the right of the company to a day is court is to me the real problem here.

        That idea is a real problem. Where did you dream it up because it certainly doesn’t describe what’s going on with Uber.

    2. were caught running red lights and committing a range of traffic violations.

      Seems like that algorithm to emulate human behavior was written a little too well…

      😉

      1. Seems the human drivers were losing their minds and helped the machines a little, would be my guess. Ever ridden in a car obeying every traffic law to the letter? Excruciating.

        1. Ever ridden in a car obeying every traffic law to the letter? Excruciating.

          Ever run a red light and kill a little kid?

          No big deal. You just pay some money to the whining parents and get on with your day. The Consitutional right to drive is yuuuuuuge.

            1. Yea there should be. It should also be against the 4th amendment to arrest anyone for a missed fine or court date on a minor misdemeanor. The traffic-industrial complex would never allow it.

          1. Yea but here in the real world, vehicles of dissimilar speeds cause accidents (and kill kids) and too tight enforcement leads to more accidents. Chaotic systems (like traffic) flow better when the elements can vary their behavior based on the environment. Worse flow leads to more dead kids. Mindless adherence to the precise rules leads to more dead kids. Neat how that works.

            Now when all the cars are robotic, flow may be maintained at fixed speeds and behavior, but tolerances will have to tighten which means it will be more dangerous mixed with human drivers or we will get much less capacity out of a given road network. Smarter to just let the robots speed and roll stop signs, appropriately, for fewer dead kids.

            Also, PS, if Facebook ain’t blue chip, the concept has no meaning. Get out of the ’90’s fella.

            1. when all the cars are robotic

              LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

              Mindless adherence to the precise rules leads to more dead kids.

              That would depend on the rules. Pretty sure there is a rather big rule in most states (in all the ones I’ve driven in, anyway) about “don’t drive over kids, even if it means breaking some other rule.” Happy to be wrong about that, though, if you have some other information that you learned on Farcebook.

              But the robot cars will make their decisions based on profit. Sometimes it will be better to squash that kid’s head under the wheel if the alternative is denting the gold plating on Trmp’s new condo.

  3. A populist campaign against Silicon Valley isn’t going to result in the creation of a European Silicon Valley. Instead, it will benefit other economies. In Asia, for example.

    Because super patriot Tr-mp supporter (surprise!) Florian Mueller can’t shove the cash into his pockets fast enough. He’s a s00per important “app developer” and a real “expert” in patents, at least in his own mind. He deserves every penny he gets, even if (or especially) he figures out the most corrupt oppressive regime with “the best tax deal” to incorporate his awesome “app developing” business.

    I’m afraid that too many people in Europe will be misled by politicians who will portray Apple as a greedy large corporation that doesn’t want to meet its obligations to society

    What’s so inaccurate about the statement that “Apple [is] a greedy large corporation that doesn’t want to meet its obligations to society”? Is it “politically incorrect” to speak of giant ultra-wealthy tax avoiding companies in this manner? I assume not because Mueller’s fellow orange maniac supporters who comment here never stop slamming “Big Corp” for its greed (of course, they want a personal giant bite of Big Corp’s pie all for themselves and none for anyone else but that’s just quibbling).

    1. MM, I haven’t waded through the tax opinion, but can you give us, in a nutshell, why Ireland is alleged to have under-taxed Apple?

      But, as to general principles, other than complying with the law, what obligations to society does Apple or any other company have? Do they have to pay additional taxes if the country in which they sell their phones are poor and need welfare?

Comments are closed.