Patently-O Bits and Bytes by Juvan Bonni

Recent Headlines in the IP World:

Commentary and Journal Articles:

New Job Postings on Patently-O:

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

  1. 2

    Prof. Christopher Buccafusco’s article is also worth a read as it discusses the functionality of music and other copyrightable works.

    This line has for a very long time been discussed.

  2. 1

    Interesting David Boundy article. It does make me wonder more about the implications of Oil States. Is the PTAB above the CAFC because of Chevron deference now? Now that patents have been held to be mere public rights.

    1. 1.1

      Does the article distinguish between ‘public rights’ and the form of personal property known as ‘Public Franchise’ rights?

      (There being a difference, of course)

    2. 1.2

      A quick read (and not even all the way through) reveals the Boundy article to be nothing more than a more detailed substantiation of what I have long called out as a requirement to be inte11ectually honest on the exceptions to the judicial doctrine of printed matter.

      For which, I provided an extremely easy to follow Step Theory Explication several years ago now — originally on the Hricik side of the blog, and repeated (more than once) in this side of the blog because Malcolm has always refused to be honest on the topic.

      My (and Boundy’s) views do nothing more than reflect the actual physical reality that “wares” in the computing arts are mere design choice and are fully patentably equivalent.


          I do not disagree.

          One of Dave’s running themes is the (based in Admin Law) improper actions of the Executive Branch administrative agency ‘making things up’ when either Statutory Law or Article III interpretations of Statutory Law dictate otherwise.

          This particular topic though is an affront on both Legal and factual grounds.

          It is quite clear that to reach a certain ‘desired Ends,’ inte11ectual DIShonesty is required.

Comments are closed.