Monday, April 25, 2016

The end justifies the vaporization of that which never should have existed in first place

It's time to blow up the world.

Maybe it should have never existed in the first place?
Because one of the lines on the map is ambiguous.
Because whoever got that extra territory did not make a good showing on his one last chance.
Because all these hurt other folk are showing up lately demanding elimination.

That logic is good enough to justify vaporization.

See Cuzzo oral arguments here.

According to Breyer J:
"And so what we're trying to do with this process is to tell the [Patent] Office, You've been doing too much too fast. [Jack was too nimble, too quick. Shouldn't have jumped over that candle stick.]

Go back and let people who are hurt by this come in and get rid of those [contempt worthy] patents that shouldn't have been issued [in the first place or even before that -you see what I mean? Like King Tut and his abacus man you know? He says stop. His grandma says stop. Stop hurting all those innocent hurt people].

Now, we will give you [the evil so-called overlord inventor, humph], again, once [(one time only)] the same chance we gave you before, and that is you can amend it once if you convince the judge you should have done it before.

But if, on the broadest possible interpretation, you know, [oh did I not misspeak myself?] "reasonable" interpretation, it shouldn't have been issued, we're canceling it [the whole thing]. And -and that is for the benefit of those people who were suffering from too many patents that shouldn't have been issued in the first place. I don't know. [meaning I am all knowing, all powerful, the chief wizard of this inquisition -visualize smug face here, visualize]"

Post Scripts: ____________________________________

Link to Patent Docs review of Cuzzo oral hearings here

Link to Patent Docs analysis of The Fantastical World of Breyer J here

Wall Street J's "Grapple" article:
"Many technology companies, including ... favor the new procedure as an effective way to attack patents that never should have been approved [in the zeroth place]."
"Justice Stephen Breyer said it is possible the new legal rules make sense if the government’s goal is to weed out bad patents and take on patent-licensing firms, which critics call “patent trolls. ... the Patent Office’s approach “is for the benefit of those people who were suffering from too many patents that shouldn’t have been issued in the first place,” Justice Breyer said.”

No comments: