On usptoexaminers.com
The patenthawk blog has come comments about usptoexaminers.com.
IPBiz made some comments a while back. Snore.
See
http://ipbiz.blogspot.com/2008/03/nanotubes-at-uspto-examiners.html
***
Patenthawk quoted Prof. Wegner: Professor Dennis Crouch in his highly reliable blog, Patently O, has now exposed a patent attorney or agent who has launched an anonymous website, "USPTOExaminers.com", as a way for practitioners to anonymously post criticisms of individual Examiners. Both examples of anonymous criticism are unacceptable, but the latter is far worse as it posts attacks against individual Examiners who have no way to defend themselves.
Separating out the anonymous issue (think patent troll tracker and the Crouch defense thereof), IPBiz suspects examiners might need management approval to make public comments, so the "no way to defend" might be an issue. IPBiz thinks back to how Robert Clarke of the USPTO was mugged by Mark Lemley in "Ending Abuse..." and no one in the legal academic community said a thing.
PatentHawk noted to Prof. Wegner: Save the outrage for the people in power, the USPTO, court judges, ones who have an impact, who should know better, the ones that, to date, you have been too afraid to take to task, because you're in the little club, and you would be ostracized if you had the courage of your convictions.
IPBiz notes back when Prof. Wegner had an article on Enron-esque accounting at the USPTO, used to fuel the Quillen / Webster nonsense on patent grant rate.
IPBiz made some comments a while back. Snore.
See
http://ipbiz.blogspot.com/2008/03/nanotubes-at-uspto-examiners.html
***
Patenthawk quoted Prof. Wegner: Professor Dennis Crouch in his highly reliable blog, Patently O, has now exposed a patent attorney or agent who has launched an anonymous website, "USPTOExaminers.com", as a way for practitioners to anonymously post criticisms of individual Examiners. Both examples of anonymous criticism are unacceptable, but the latter is far worse as it posts attacks against individual Examiners who have no way to defend themselves.
Separating out the anonymous issue (think patent troll tracker and the Crouch defense thereof), IPBiz suspects examiners might need management approval to make public comments, so the "no way to defend" might be an issue. IPBiz thinks back to how Robert Clarke of the USPTO was mugged by Mark Lemley in "Ending Abuse..." and no one in the legal academic community said a thing.
PatentHawk noted to Prof. Wegner: Save the outrage for the people in power, the USPTO, court judges, ones who have an impact, who should know better, the ones that, to date, you have been too afraid to take to task, because you're in the little club, and you would be ostracized if you had the courage of your convictions.
IPBiz notes back when Prof. Wegner had an article on Enron-esque accounting at the USPTO, used to fuel the Quillen / Webster nonsense on patent grant rate.
posted by Lawrence B. Ebert at 5:32 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home