Real Science? Get that junk out of our courts sir!

"I have been a professor of organic chemistry for nine years ... I cannot accept a Supreme Court decision that trivializes chemistry and elevates [misunderstood] biological ”information” over [the real science of] chemical structure in patent law, and that usurps the role of Congress and creates a new class of patent-ineligible subject matter by judicial fiat."

So writes one scientist in his
Chemist's View of the Supreme Court's Gene Patent Decision

(Pictured above is Galileo's Recant)

Framing Inventors out of Innovation's Box

"Innovation" is an anonymizing, impersonal "thing".

There is no human inventor behind or inside the closed box that frames the "Innovation" concept.

...
...
...
...
...
...
...
The "inventor" is not left as invisible or even marginalized outside the box, but rather vaporized (vay-pooh-rized) as if he or she never existed.
Indeed no person breathes, bleeds, sweats and strains within the totally-automated factory that we think of as being modern "innovation" per se.

Consider for example this article:
Why The Patent System Is Not Fit

How often does the word "inventor" appear?
Answer: none.
Why?

Embracing the Mental Midget's Metaphors (or How I Learned to Love the Idiocracy)

Scientists tell us
our brains work
with metaphors.

So it is no small wonder that
the US Supreme Court g(r)asped for
metaphoric help when trying to grapple
with the micro-bio-chemistry monster that
confronted them in AMP v. Myriad

Pray tell us,
is it more like strolling through the Garden of Eden and plucking a leaf off the Tree of Knowledge?
Or are we standing in the machine shop and whittling down the trunk until only cellulose in the form of a baseball bat remains?

Which rings more poetically true in the biochemistry quiz that vexes us?

Surely the gods will inform us of the correct answer by meme of the harmonically resonating spheres if only we carefully circle competing narratives and listen for the vibrations of the truer truth.
Ours is not to truly understand but rather to appear as if song-speaking from Olympian quarters.

This has always been the Herculean task of a Supreme.

Appearance is perception.
Perception is Truth.
We know an ultimate truth when we hear it.
The mortals beneath can bank on our sound logic.

If you are not in tune with the split metaphor way of thinking of English major Supremes, here is how the divide in AMP v. Myriad came into being:

The molecular composition known as "cDNA" appears to have been synthetically milled on the lathe of the life scientists and hence it is machine-shop "eligible".

However, the molecular composition known as "BRCAx" appears to have been naturally and simply plucked from Nature's Tree of Life and thus it is not a product of machine shop synthesis but rather a natural drop out from Mother Nature's loins, hence "ineligible".

Footnotes
(1) Transcript of Oral Hearings 4-15-2014
(2) The European view (not an Idiocracy?)
(3) Blood, Sweat & Isolataion? --too bad
(4) Debbie Does Disease Tech
(5) The Curious Concurrence of Justice Antonin Scalia
(6) The "Hercules Unchained" Metaphor
(7) If you patent a molecule, you sir are a "troll"
(8) Patent Docs looks back at Myriad Reactions
(9) More ... here, here, here, here, here,
(10) Recent blog posts ...

One Nation, Under Rule of Isolated Politico-Arbiters, With Idiocracy and Mediocrity for All

AMP v. Myriad Genetics (click here for Wiki page including SCOTUS decision)


In the movie, "Idiocracy", actor Luke Wilson plays the role of an Average-IQ Joe ("Joe Bauers") who is transported into a future where every American is so dumb (or brain washed by political dogma) that Joe turns out to be the smartest man in America.
How dumb are they all?

So dumb that they don't know to irrigate their crops with "isolated" (pure) water.

They all believe, due to repeated brain washing, that a drink called "Brawndo" (a spin on Gatorade) has to be used for everything (including feeding their crops) because ...

because "it's got electrolytes".

They have no clue what these electrolytes are and why they are "good". This taken on pure faith.

On June 13th 2013, America sunk deeper toward its inevitable collission with an "Idiocracy" future thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court decision on patenting of "genes".

At least one of the Justices (Scalia) admits he has no idea what an "isolated gene" is; but in his being one of the "Supremes", one of the isolated deities who rule America, he must agree that the thing he fails to understand is nonetheless not patent "eligible". Scalia wrote (in concurrence):

"[Admittedly, I don't grasp the] fine details of molecular biology. [Even though] I am unable to affirm those details on my own knowledge or even my own belief [it] suffices for me to affirm [their idiocracies], having studied the opinions below and the expert briefs presented here, that the portion of DNA isolated from its natural state sought to be patented is identical [...IDENTICAL...] to that portion of the DNA in its natural state; ..."

Welcome to Idiocracy USA --we got electoral college "lytes"

At least a few sites get it on how "sketchy" the Supremes are in their science:
(1) The Supreme Court’s Sketchy Science
(2) Supreme Court bungles the science in DNA patent decision
(3) Supreme Court Gets ... Science Wrong
(4) Errors in Supreme Court Decision
(5) On "Junk Science" --Wiki
(6) The art of the metaphor (See also Metaphor & Policy in Patent Landmines-stan)

Down the Parrot Hole with CLS and Alice

In law school, students are taught to parrot
the words of "AUTHORITATIVE" sources. The blue pill.
Pith hath no zenith higher
than Blue Book perfect citation to precedential and on point squawking.

Parroting the verbiage of a drunkard who
is discovered foaming at the end of a strip mall alley
buys you no bonus points.
But ah, to quote the learned words
of a Judge Learned Hand,
that be a thing of jurisprudential beauty.

For what doth it gaineth
a legal scholar
to have original thought ...

when quotation from authoritative mouth piece
does so much better (for one's career)?

And so it is that we find ourselves
beating back against the waves
of a judicial Idiocracy emerging out of patent law decisions
such as that of CLS versus Alice

Here, each judge parrots
the gibberish of a previous judge,
and the latter repeats from yet another predecessor,
and so on ad infinitim until the nonsense
rises into the form of a living, breathing monster.

Ultimately, corporations become "people".

Machines become mere "abstractions".

Reality becomes just a draftsman's illusion.
And jurisprudential delusion substitutes in for reality.

On Software Patents and Soft Think Judges, Humpty Dumpty Comments

Howdy !

My name is Humpty Dumpty

Come sit a spell with me.

Yes, up here on the wall.
Fresh air.
Sunshine.

You know, it's an odd thing.

When the sun enlightens me,
my thoughts get slightly poached
and then scrambled beyond comprehension.
Do bright things do that for you too?
Consider my deep blue thoughts
on the issue of "Software Patents".


I've always said that
I am the master of my thoughts.
My thoughts are not masters over me.
And therefore, "When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less."
Federal Judges operate under the same principle.
They exert command over reality, not the other way around.
The bright sunlight meanings that they project onto words illuminate us all!

Consider as example, this "brilliant" statement:
"When a claim recites patent-ineligible subject matter it is invalid under 35 U.S.C. §101"
EXAMPLE 1: What is claimed is: A support means for a judge's dairy aire
comprising:
(1) two arm rests;
(2) one buttocks cushioning means;
(3) three flimsy legs to tilt upon; and
(4) a cranial rest means upon which to prop one's heavy headed thoughts.

This claim recites the numbers, 1, 2 and 3; all ineligible.
Ergo, EXAMPLE 1 fails under 35 U.S.C. §101.
One merely needs to seek out the right words within a claim and put a leash around them so as to become their master and not let the other words (the "insignificant" words) clutter one's thoughts.

Let's see how gettin' rid of them "insignificant" words works in another similar situation.
Don't run away
and leave me a sittin' on this wall all alone,
tottering on the edge of excitement.
Hang on.
This next part will be a truly White Rabbit experience for you.
 (Click more to see the next example)

And one pill makes you 10 feet small --Go Ask Alice (v. CLS)

During a tour of the set of the popular TV show "Big Bang Theory",

a tired Judge Pauline Newman collapses into

the chair of one of their props, the H.G. Wells Time Machine.
Her eyes barely start to close when the time wheel behind her spins into motion.
Faster and faster. Crazy fast.

The music begins to blast.

With no warning, it all transforms into an image of a spinning compass needle, "directing" its aim to all manner of targets, real and abstract.

Then it deforms once more, into to a top view of a Wizard of Oz tornado.
The witch on broomstick begins her hideous screech.

With a thunk,

Perilous Pauline finds herself
dead dropped into the Land of the Mental Munchkins

"We represent the anti-software patents league,"
they began in sing song syncopation, ...
"... the anti-software patents league, ... the anti-software patents league, ...

The mayor steps forward.
"Welcome to the County of Go Ask Alice,"
he proclaims

"Here in Go Ask Alice County, all is not as it seems.
A machine is not a machine, a process is not a process.
They are mere words; "tools" if you must.
Tools in an abstract twisty worded world.
Fundamentals of a fundamentally defunded mentality.

We hold these truths to be self evident:
Claims should not be coextensive with a natural law, natural phenomenon, or abstract idea

They should be violative of "science"
and of all mode of rational ideation!
Only "nonabstract" ideas (no such thing) are allowed.
Heads you lose. Tails means patent haters win.

Don't believe me?
Go ask Alice (v. CLS)