Patently-O Bits and Bytes by Juvan Bonni

Recent Headlines in the IP World:


Commentary and Journal Articles:

New Job Postings on Patently-O:

16 thoughts on “Patently-O Bits and Bytes by Juvan Bonni

  1. 3

    link to

    Great du mb a $$ Ruth will be around for another 5 years. The mor on that said that patents weren’t for organizing human behavior. Du mb a $$ Ruth must be one of the most disgraceful justices in terms of patent law to ever be on the Supreme Court or any court.

  2. 2

    Since it is such a hot topic here and re the pending PTO proposed rule change for claim interpretation in IPRs, note that this was just published by the IPO:
    The IPO U.S. Post-Grant Patent Office Practice Committee and the IPO U.S. Patent Law Committee collaborated on a new white paper entitled “How Different Are the Broadest Reasonable Interpretation and Phillips Claim Construction Standards?” The full white paper is available today on the IPO Law Journal Patent Section.”

    1. 2.1

      Let’s all remember that “law journal” has no peer review and no consequences for unethical behavior. A “law journal” article should be given no more weight than an anonymous blog post.

      1. 2.1.2

        This is an IPO Committee study, not a law journal article, nor is it by academics, nor is it theoretical. It is by law firm patent law practitioners, who do care what other practitioners or potential clients may think of their work.

  3. 1

    link to

    It is interesting to think about this more. As many inventions will become essential instructions to a larger machine —just like software. What if you could buy a machine to make different molecules and it was affordable? Then why couldn’t you program it to make the medications you want?

    And think bigger. We are not too many years away from factories that will be able to make just about anything and the instructions to make it will be software.

    The intellectual frame work set up by Benson and pushed the anti-patent crowd (i.e., large international monopolies and their b*tches) is simply not rigorous to deal with these situations. Why? Because they are wrong.

    1. 1.1

      Lol / I have long put forth the meme of the Big Box of Protons, Neutrons and Electrons.

      That big box reflects the anti’s “logic,” and the fact that any such Big Box eliminates patents for anything composed of (or configured with) protons, neutrons, and electrons.

      The meme originated long ago based on a conversation of Star Trek economy – an economy that necesarily was changed with the advent of a machine (the Big Box) that could generate anything at all (the replicator).

      Tea. Earl Gray. Hot.

      1. 1.1.1

        Yes the big box of protons, neutrons, and electrons is a good analogy in the way the anti-patent people try to reduce information processing to no invention.

        Actually, it is funny but one of the ways they look for new drugs is that almost generate new molecules randomly and then put them in the water with zebra fish and if there is a reaction, then they study the molecule further.


          Are you practiced in Chemistry? I’m sure they take the DNA from a Hemophiliac and use it as a blood thinner. And take DNA from a person that has Narcolepsy for a sleeping aid. etc etc., And the list goes on and on. It’s a guessing game with some very serious problems to many when taken. And they charge us for this when they already have most of their formulas there for the taking.


            I’m 4,321 years old thanks to my daily dose (8 – 12 ounces) of Young People Blood. The only side effect is heliophobia and an aversion to crosses.


              When MM has no response he become glib. A glib MM is a wrong MM that won’t admit he is wrong.


            Interesting Singular. I am not too practiced in chemistry. Long ago I took various chemistry courses and I have written some patent applications on DNA related inventions.

            Interesting, though, Singular…


          Just look what it did to MM. He rants psychotically about imagined abstract ideas.

Comments are closed.