What a fine collection of hard working dedicated professionals they have
working there... makes you proud.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-500395_1...-to-the-patent
-office-you-have-to-read/

Erik

Erik wrote:
What a fine collection of hard working dedicated professionals they
have working there... makes you proud.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-500395_1...-to-the-patent
-office-you-have-to-read/

Erik

The byline is Erik Sherman. You?


--

Reply in group, but if emailing remove the last word.

In article ,
"Tom Del Rosso" wrote:

Erik wrote:
What a fine collection of hard working dedicated professionals they
have working there... makes you proud.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-500395_1...-to-the-patent
-office-you-have-to-read/

Erik

The byline is Erik Sherman. You?

No, not me... didn't even catch that...

Erik

"Erik" wrote in message
...
What a fine collection of hard working dedicated professionals they have
working there... makes you proud.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-500395_1...-to-the-patent
-office-you-have-to-read/

Erik


That was embarrassing. Sounds like a UseNet lawyer, that letter
accomplished nothing.

Actually, altho ahm no 'spert, it seems like a patent examiner is doing
someone a favor when they reject a patent, bec ultimately an approved patent
is just a doorway to endless litigation, should you choose to be territorial
about yer "intellectual property" -- or should you fall victim to someone
who is.

A patent examiner who does a sloppy incomplete search, thus approving an
application, does the applicant more of a disservice than one who denies a
patent.
One of the strategies of people trying to circumvent existing patents is to
do ultra-thorough searches of the literature, media, and "art", and the
chances are disturbingly high that they will succeed.

If this guy is miffed, he should file in Europe, where they rubber stamp
EVERY patent application, and leave it for the patented crabs in a barrel to
duke it out in very espensive litigation. Imo, they pretty much rubber stamp
**** in the US as well, altho not by statute.

Read Don Lancaster's take on patenting. Patenting is largely a but another
con -- unless the stakes are very high, like, Apple vs Samsung -- and I'll
bet apple/samsung would think patenting is a con, after dat mega-million
bull****.
--
EA