CLS Bank v. Alice Corp was an en banc decision that attempted to set the record straight on 35 USC 101. IT FAILED. The patents in suit deal with settlement risk in financial transactions. The holding can be boiled down to we don’t like patents on software or on financial transactions and we really don’t like patents that cover both.
Is 35 USC 101 Judge by the Claims?
As I tortured myself reading this decision I wondered if 35 USC 101 is really a question about
...read more...
Below is an updated chart of the CAFC judges and whether they are patent attorneys or have a technical background. In my opinion and based on the latest rulings out of the CAFC all the Judges on this court should have a technical degree and be patent attorneys. Presently only four of the judges are patent attorneys and only five of the judges have a technical background. This is down from five judges being patent attorneys in 2010 and in April of 2011. Clearly neither Congress or the Obama administration have put a very high priority on the quality of judges at the CAFC.
| Judge | Patent Attorney | Technical Background | ||
| Rader | No | ...read more...
According to Kiwi Blog “A good move from the Gov’t on patents” there is a new Patent Bill that will prohibit patents on software. Logically, this suggests that there is something special about software that is incompatible with patents. In order to determine, we first have to have a clear understanding of what software is and what a patent is. A patent is a property right that a person earns by creating a new invention. But what is an invention? An invention is anything created by man that has an objective result. This definition clearly delineates that inventions are not things in nature or 
David Kelley gave a talk on Ayn Rand vs. Friedrich Hayek On Abstraction. (If you want to read Mr. Kelly’s paper on point click here) This is a very important talk and explains the difference between Austrian economists and free market (objectivists). It also helps explain why Austrian economists who say they are for free markets are against patents, which are property rights in one’s invention.
Saturday, 27 April 2013 - Posted by dbhalling in News
The following gives the history of the global warming movement and explains why the scientists overwhelmingly believe that human CO2 does not play a significant role. History: In the 1970’s there was a period of global cooling which led the media to a frenzy of reporting a coming ice age. A considerable body of knowledge existed on climate change and the phenomena which have caused it to occur. Examples are such phenomena as changes in the earth’s orbit, the orientation of the earth axis of rotation, variation in cosmic ray flux, and changes in the ocean currents. For decades the Greenhouse Effect on the earth’s temperature had been known. Therefore, during the 1970’s, a Swedish scientist proposed that humans increase their output of CO2 in order to 
Monday, 22 April 2013 - Posted by dbhalling in Innovation, News
Earth Day was created in the Nixon administration and the first was in 1970. This day violates the 1st Amendment by the Federal Government “respecting an establishment of religion.” Environmentalists are often portrayed by the Media as lovable, good natured people; people who only want to save some adorable furry creature and pick up trash. Environmentalist groups target new technologies claiming that they are dangerous or unproven. For instance, they killed off the nuclear power industry. The policies they advocate are anti-innovation and have destroyed advances in
Yesterday the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics No. 11-725 and once again proved that they are incompetent to rule on patent cases. The Justice made analogies to baseball bats and chocolate cookies in trying to understand this case involving genetic testing for breast cancer. For more see USA article and Genetic Engineering and BioTechnology News articles. Asking these Supreme Court Judges to rule on this decision makes about as 
The Supreme Court is hearing oral arguments in the Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics No. 11-725 case that revolves around the myth that you can patent a person’s genes. Typical of the idiocy surrounding this case is the article by the AP, which states that this case is about monopolies for human genes. The author proves not only their lack of understanding of the science, but also the fact that they do not know that patents are a property right. (For more on Patents, Property Rights and Monopolies see below) A number of books have also pushed the agenda that 
The en banc rehearing of this case is considering whether the presumption of validity applies to under 35 USC 101. The statute involved in this question is 35 USC § 282 which states:
According to CBC News Margaret Thatcher practiced patent law. After being called to the bar she specialized in patent law and then tax law, until 1961. No wonder, she was one of the greatest leaders of the 20th Century. Thatcher died today at 87. As Prime Minister she took the decaying cesspool that Socialists and Marxist had turned Great Britain into and made it proud, strong and great 
Popular Posts
Last Modified
|
Recent Comments