For an updated version of this article please see:
|Today's Date: July 31, 2014||Search | Home | Contact | Services | Patent Attorney | Patent Search | Provisional Patent Application | Patent Application | Software Patent | Confidentiality Agreements|
Most Recent Articles on IPWatchdog.com
Posted: Saturday, Nov 26, 2011 @ 2:48 pm | Written by Gene Quinn | 4 comments
Posted in: Educational Information for Inventors, Gene Quinn, Inventors Information, IP News, IPWatchdog.com Articles, Patent Basics, Patents
For an updated version of this article please see:
Posted: Thursday, Nov 24, 2011 @ 12:00 am | Written by Gene Quinn | 2 comments
Posted in: Fun Stuff, Gene Quinn, Holiday Patents, IP News, IPWatchdog.com Articles, Patents
Did you know that since President George H. W. Bush started the tradition of pardoning turkeys in 1989 there have been 24 turkeys to receive Presidential Pardons, sparing them from the dinner table? Somewhat ironically, that first turkey to receive a Presidential Pardon was sent to Frying Pan Park in Herndon, Virginia. In any event, the latest two turkeys to receive a Pardon were Peace and Liberty, both who received a pardon by President Barack Obama in a ceremony held on the North Portico of the White House.
But was President George H. W. Bush the first to pardon a turkey? According to the definitive history of turkey pardons on the White House blog, the answer is technically yes but not really yes. While there are rumors that President Lincoln issued the first pardon at the behest of his son, it is known that in 1963 President Kennedy returned the turkey sent to the White House saying: “We’ll just let this one grow.” Perhaps not exactly a pardon, but the turkey was spared the death penalty.
Posted: Wednesday, Nov 23, 2011 @ 11:05 am | Written by Sue D. Nym | 12 comments
Posted in: Federal Circuit, Guest Contributors, IP News, IPWatchdog.com Articles, Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Patents, USPTO
The Federal Circuit is considering whether to hear In re Lovin en banc, and indeed they should rehear Lovin en banc. The Federal Circuit should defend the applicant’s right to receive a meaningful explanation of claim rejections before the applicant is required to rebut the rejections.
Lovin has received exceptional attention in the patent law blogosphere. The facts of Lovin are discussed here at Ryan Alley’s blog. In short, Lovin permits an examiner to wait until an examiner’s answer to explain how and why dependent claims are rejected. What’s worse, Lovin permits the examiner to require the applicant to provide a substantive reason for patentability before the examiner explains the rejection. There have also been prominent discussions of Lovin regarding the PTO’s compliance with administrative law at PatentlyO and at IPWatchdog.
Posted: Monday, Nov 21, 2011 @ 12:19 pm | Written by James Yang | 19 comments
Posted in: Blogs & Websites, Guest Contributors, IP News, IPWatchdog.com Articles, Patents
I updated the Top 50 Patent Blogs list that Gene started back in 2009. Its dwindled below 50 because a few sites no longer exist. I provide two different ways to rank the blogs in the list. The first method which is Google’s page rank is more qualitative which I think might be a bit more fair to those that write and maintain their blogs out of passion. The second method is Alexa figures which calculate traffic to a blog over the past three months.
When I first started blogging, I read most of the blogs in Gene’s top 50 list. Its possible if you read them through a reader. Over a very short period of time, I stopped reading a few of the blogs. Believe it or not. I stopped reading some of the most popular blogs. The writing style and content of those blogs didn’t give me any useful content. As I was compiling the Top Blogs list below, I started to think about a more equitable ranking system. Each blog has its own flavor and that is the way a blog should be written. As you will see, I didn’t include magazines that had a popular blog because the blog didn’t have a personality behind the blog. I just think that a blog should be an extension of one’s persona online.
Posted: Sunday, Nov 20, 2011 @ 9:00 am | Written by Bob Zeidman | Comments Off
Posted in: Bob Zeidman, Computers, Copyright, Guest Contributors, IP News, IPWatchdog.com Articles, Patent Litigation, Patents, Software, Trade Secrets
Gene has asked me to write an executive summary that conveys the essence of my new book, The Software IP Detective’s Handbook: Measurement, Comparison, and Infringement Detection. While I definitely appreciate his request, I hope I’m not completely successful because that would mean that the two years of nights and weekends I spent writing the book, not to mention the years developing the mathematical algorithms and the methodologies described in the book, could have been done in a single evening.
I’ve personally been working as an expert witness in intellectual property disputes, specializing in software cases, for about 15 years. When I began working in this area, I found that most experts used a combination of off-the-shelf computer code analysis programs, home-grown analysis programs, and lots of long hours and late nights poring over lines of code. Some experts used tools available from universities that are called “software plagiarism detection tools” that produced dubious results even when they executed correctly. Expert reports were then written and rebutted. Arguments often got very technical and detailed and could easily confuse a non-technical judge or jury. Different experts often had different definitions of plagiarism or found different signs that they considered markers for copied code. Some parties to a litigation, and some experts they hired I’m sad to say, seemed to purposely cloud the issue to justify illicit or at least questionable behavior. I decided that a standard measure of software copying that could be objectively tested was needed, and so I developed code correlation.