On Tue, 23 May 2017 14:15:13 -0400, ads wrote:

On Mon, 22 May 2017 22:43:51 -0400, woodchucker
wrote:

http://www.finehomebuilding.com/2017...ules-tablesaws

Capacitance sensing of contact is NOT a new technology - it is simple
and ancieant electrical knowledge. The judge who issued the ruling of
"patent violation" is too technically ignorant to be allowed to judge
anything.

That's completely irrelevant. Right or _wrong_, the USPTO is
considered the expert. The judge having ruled on it, seals it as
fact. It will take every nuke in the world to budge the courts.

That makes as much sense as the Patent Office giving a patent to
wheelbarrow design when someone designed a new type of dump handle for
the wheelbarrow - yes, they did that.

When reading patents, forget everything but the claims section. Often
what is actually being patented has nothing to do with the discussion
that precedes it. I don't know which patent you're referencing but
I've pulled a lot apart that aren't at all what people think they are.

The judge and the SawStop attorneys should be found in contempt of the
Court of Common Sense and their sentence is 90 days sawing old oak
with a handsaw.

Sounds an awful lot like corporate payments twisting judicial opinion
to get forced purchase of a patented device with only one source.

That's the worry. Not sure how valid it is at this point. Insurance
is a more lasting force.