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

13 thoughts on “PatentlyO Bits and Bytes by Anthony McCain

  1. I have to deal with Alice at the PTO. Alice is treason. Alice completely undermines the 1952 Patent Act. The rejections are total garbage. The opinions from the CAFC are total garbage. The opinions from the PTAB are total garbage.

    Alice is not law. Alice is like going before a sovereign and begging for your life. The sovereign has almost complete discretion to come up with whatever they want.

    Each of the justices that put their name to Alice should be tried for treason.

    1. Just imagine any other law that was turned into Alice. No evidence. Just wild speculation on the part of the judge. No need to use the existing statute. If you put any thought into it, you would realize it is treason. It undermines our entire system of laws.

  2. More than HALF of the posts on this thread are directly linked to Malcolm blight of a NON-patent law nature.

    Blight that has been repeatedly eliminated in the past (successively in one recent instance of the same message removed three days in a row; on another occasion when someone else stated the same things that I state; and most recently, merely because a different editor was involved).

    link to patentlyo.com

    As with nearly all of Malcolm’s such rants, the comment in the link applies.

    (for the click-impaired, that link reads:

    The incongruity runs deeper than what you [Malcolm] would like to spin and goes to the heart of your Liberal Left anti-personal property philosophies.

    That you seek to apply a gloss of “undeserved” or “already rich” or the even more banal “they are attorneys” is just that: gloss.

    The level and degree of your NON-patent rants betray your animus when it comes to patents because patents are used (gasp) to make money.

    It is NOT your responsibility to anoint yourself Catcher of the Fields of patent rye – that is merely a veil of delusion that you use to NOT engage on the merits of various legal topics and instead – pretty much regardless of actual thread topic – for you to rant from your tired scripts.

    As you have been doing for eleven and a half years.

    As I have also noted, Malcolm is the SINGLE person that has rebuked corrective efforts and vowed to continue posting the very things that are removed for being blight on this patent law blog.

    He continues to anoint himself some NON-patent law “savior” and deems ANYONE not agreeing with his ability to rant on endlessly – no matter the actual thread topic – as someone that MUST be in that other single bucket that his rants are aimed against.

    He simply does not care that this is a patent law blog.

    WHY this remains an ongoing issue is what draws some seriously negative perceptions as to this blog and whether or not this blog has a non-objective agenda that is being pursued.

    NO ONE is saying that Malcolm cannot have his feelings – no matter what those feelings are (his diatribes to the opposite are merely more smokescreens).

    But instead of things like a list of animated emoticons, would not the pizza thrown to the college students at the local coffeehouse over the weekend be better put with an aim of actually curtailing the known NON-patent law blight?

  3. Despite the title above, the Neil Solomon piece is remarkably scant on evidence to back up its thesis. A typical sentence reads like this “[M]any of the ALJs have represented the large tech company infringers that institute the IPRs, showing a revolving door with blatant conflicts of interest.”

    Many? How many? 50%? 10%? Either one could qualify as “many,” but it makes rather a difference to the assertion being advanced. Meanwhile, as regards “conflict of interest,” how many of those “many” ALJs sit on panels judging their former clients, or even companies that compete in the same markets as their former clients? Once again, this is a point where details really matter to the accusation being leveled, and yet no details are furnished.

    This is a poorly written hit job. Not that I was expecting much better.

  4. Fake glibertarian hero, hypocrite and overall ign0r am us of the highest order Rand Paul (Rep u k k ke) is supporting disgraced ex-jerge Roy “Moore’s run for Senate.

    Nobody could have predicted that.

    1. What the F has that to do with patent law Malcolm?

      Even for a “bits and bytes” with 6 chances at being relevant, all we get is (more of the same) inane NON-patent law ranting?

      I am sure that THAT is welcome somewhere. But it should not be welcome here.

      1. it should not be welcome here.

        Because here we pretend that nothing else is happening and everything is normal.

        “anon” likes it that way. Shall we guess why?

      2. What the F has that to do with patent law Malcolm?

        Well your glibertarian comrade Rand Paul is also on the record proposing that people with no expertise be opining on every Federal grant in the sciences because … well, because that’s what freedom smells like to Rand Paul. We’re free to be clueless! And why not? It’s just science, after all. Not nearly as important as worshipping some ancient scrolls or waving a flag.

Comments are closed.