Comments on: Top 10 Patent Stories of the Decade 2000-2009 (Part 2) http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/12/31/top-10-patent-stories-of-the-decade-2000-2009-part-2/id=7963/ Patents, Software Patents, Patent Applications & Patent Law Thu, 09 Feb 2012 07:58:49 +0000 hourly 1 By: Gene Quinn http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/12/31/top-10-patent-stories-of-the-decade-2000-2009-part-2/id=7963/#comment-10131 Gene Quinn Mon, 04 Jan 2010 12:44:52 +0000 http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=7963#comment-10131 Rocky- All it takes to make the Top 10 is a really important event. While Rambus is important to many, no new law was made. It was essentially an isolated battle. On top of that, the final chapter has not been written. With the upcoming trial and likely more appeals we will get a better idea of what the truth really is in this case. It looks like Rambus has been jerked around, both by the government, competitors and by Rambus management who authorized the wholesale destruction of volumes of evidence. The real losers have been the shareholders. Rambus will make the honorable mention list, and if the final round of trials and appeals show what Rambus believers think they will then the saga will certainly be at the top of the next decade. If when the dust settles Rambus is as guilty as others just having done different things then it will be just like hundreds or thousands of other epic litigations where no one wins and shareholders get screwed. -Gene Rocky-

All it takes to make the Top 10 is a really important event. While Rambus is important to many, no new law was made. It was essentially an isolated battle. On top of that, the final chapter has not been written. With the upcoming trial and likely more appeals we will get a better idea of what the truth really is in this case. It looks like Rambus has been jerked around, both by the government, competitors and by Rambus management who authorized the wholesale destruction of volumes of evidence. The real losers have been the shareholders.

Rambus will make the honorable mention list, and if the final round of trials and appeals show what Rambus believers think they will then the saga will certainly be at the top of the next decade. If when the dust settles Rambus is as guilty as others just having done different things then it will be just like hundreds or thousands of other epic litigations where no one wins and shareholders get screwed.

-Gene

]]> By: Rocky http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/12/31/top-10-patent-stories-of-the-decade-2000-2009-part-2/id=7963/#comment-10127 Rocky Sat, 02 Jan 2010 17:18:09 +0000 http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=7963#comment-10127 Hmmm....no Rambus. Makes me wonder what it takes to make into your Top 10 Patent Stories of the Decade. I don't think any of these stories actually got Rambus beat for the amount of time this cluster has been going on. Hmmm….no Rambus. Makes me wonder what it takes to make into your Top 10 Patent Stories of the Decade. I don’t think any of these stories actually got Rambus beat for the amount of time this cluster has been going on.

]]> By: Trent http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/12/31/top-10-patent-stories-of-the-decade-2000-2009-part-2/id=7963/#comment-10126 Trent Sat, 02 Jan 2010 08:00:11 +0000 http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=7963#comment-10126 The lower courts since KSR don't seem to have a very good way of providing weight to the secondary factors. The courts must consider the secondary factors, but what good is considering them if the Deere factors trump them anyway? An excellent example is Leapfrog Enterprises, Inc. v. Fisher-Price, Inc., 485 F.3d 1157 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (affirming that "Leapfrog had provided substantial evidence of commercial success, praise, and long-felt need, but that, given the strength of the prima facie obviousness showing, the evidence on secondary considerations was inadequate to overcome a final conclusion that claim 25 would have been obvious"). Perhaps I exaggerate when I say that the secondary factors have become worthless, but I'd like to see a recent case where they held that much weight. The lower courts since KSR don’t seem to have a very good way of providing weight to the secondary factors. The courts must consider the secondary factors, but what good is considering them if the Deere factors trump them anyway? An excellent example is Leapfrog Enterprises, Inc. v. Fisher-Price, Inc., 485 F.3d 1157 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (affirming that “Leapfrog had provided substantial evidence of commercial success, praise, and long-felt need, but that, given the strength of the prima facie obviousness showing, the evidence on secondary considerations was inadequate to overcome a final conclusion that claim 25 would have been obvious”).

Perhaps I exaggerate when I say that the secondary factors have become worthless, but I’d like to see a recent case where they held that much weight.

]]> By: Michael Feigin, Patent Attorney http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/12/31/top-10-patent-stories-of-the-decade-2000-2009-part-2/id=7963/#comment-10121 Michael Feigin, Patent Attorney Fri, 01 Jan 2010 17:57:32 +0000 http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=7963#comment-10121 I wouldn't put KSR first... in reality, it hasn't changed much for patent prosecution and it upholds previous law. On the other hand... where's Bilski? Understandably, the Supreme Court didn't issue a ruling yet, but the CAFC decision changed my patent prosecution strategy significantly. I'd put that in the top five, if not the top 2. I wouldn’t put KSR first… in reality, it hasn’t changed much for patent prosecution and it upholds previous law. On the other hand… where’s Bilski? Understandably, the Supreme Court didn’t issue a ruling yet, but the CAFC decision changed my patent prosecution strategy significantly. I’d put that in the top five, if not the top 2.

]]> By: James http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/12/31/top-10-patent-stories-of-the-decade-2000-2009-part-2/id=7963/#comment-10117 James Fri, 01 Jan 2010 02:41:39 +0000 http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=7963#comment-10117 Since No. 1 will be read the most, just want to point out the spelling error and typo: so single "handidly" screwed up more than "in" they did in KSR Since No. 1 will be read the most, just want to point out the spelling error and typo: so single “handidly” screwed up more than “in” they did in KSR

]]> By: Gene Quinn http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/12/31/top-10-patent-stories-of-the-decade-2000-2009-part-2/id=7963/#comment-10113 Gene Quinn Thu, 31 Dec 2009 22:58:58 +0000 http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=7963#comment-10113 Trent- Can you elaborate a bit. I am definitely interested in hearing more of your thoughts on secondary considerations. _Gene Trent-

Can you elaborate a bit. I am definitely interested in hearing more of your thoughts on secondary considerations.

_Gene

]]> By: Gene Quinn http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/12/31/top-10-patent-stories-of-the-decade-2000-2009-part-2/id=7963/#comment-10112 Gene Quinn Thu, 31 Dec 2009 22:58:25 +0000 http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=7963#comment-10112 Cowboy- I agree 100% with you, and will be on that issue quite soon --- in fact starting with my Patent Wishes for 2010, which should be out tomorrow or sometime over the weekend. Having said this, as Zohan points out, we need to be careful what we wish for. No one can screw things up quite like Congress can! Having said that, it is certainly worth attempting to get right rather than watching things fall apart. -Gene Cowboy-

I agree 100% with you, and will be on that issue quite soon — in fact starting with my Patent Wishes for 2010, which should be out tomorrow or sometime over the weekend.

Having said this, as Zohan points out, we need to be careful what we wish for. No one can screw things up quite like Congress can! Having said that, it is certainly worth attempting to get right rather than watching things fall apart.

-Gene

]]> By: Trent http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/12/31/top-10-patent-stories-of-the-decade-2000-2009-part-2/id=7963/#comment-10111 Trent Thu, 31 Dec 2009 21:52:47 +0000 http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=7963#comment-10111 Adding to the KSR aftermath analysis, let's not forget how worthless secondary factors have become. Adding to the KSR aftermath analysis, let’s not forget how worthless secondary factors have become.

]]> By: The Zohan http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/12/31/top-10-patent-stories-of-the-decade-2000-2009-part-2/id=7963/#comment-10110 The Zohan Thu, 31 Dec 2009 21:31:28 +0000 http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=7963#comment-10110 Cowboy, Be careful what you wish for. Sometimes the cure is worse than the disease. Cowboy,

Be careful what you wish for.
Sometimes the cure is worse than the disease.

]]> By: American Cowboy http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/12/31/top-10-patent-stories-of-the-decade-2000-2009-part-2/id=7963/#comment-10108 American Cowboy Thu, 31 Dec 2009 21:27:47 +0000 http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=7963#comment-10108 Gene, I think it is time for a new patent reform bill that fixes KSR, eBay, etc. What say you? Gene, I think it is time for a new patent reform bill that fixes KSR, eBay, etc. What say you?

]]>