Is gun ownership a fundamental right? More cases to come.
A story on DC v. Heller (District of Columbia gun law case) ended with a quote from Alan Morrison:
"The bottom line is, it looks like a full-employment decision for lots of gun lawyers and state, federal and municipal lawyers."
IPBiz notes that one of the great ironies of "patent reform 2008" (S. 1145) was that so-called reformers were pushing "for" post-grant review (aka opposition) AND, at the same time, complaining about the self-interest of patent lawyers. The introduction of oppositions would have been a full-employment decision for lots of patent lawyers. Needless to say, the "reformers" would never mention the patent lawyers, like Joe Hosteny, who vigorously opposed oppositions on the basis such things would hurt inventors.
Of course, once damages apportionment went away, and the Coalition for Patent Fairness packed up and went home, one saw that the patent quality issue was a smokescreen, merely a prop for a different agenda.
"The bottom line is, it looks like a full-employment decision for lots of gun lawyers and state, federal and municipal lawyers."
IPBiz notes that one of the great ironies of "patent reform 2008" (S. 1145) was that so-called reformers were pushing "for" post-grant review (aka opposition) AND, at the same time, complaining about the self-interest of patent lawyers. The introduction of oppositions would have been a full-employment decision for lots of patent lawyers. Needless to say, the "reformers" would never mention the patent lawyers, like Joe Hosteny, who vigorously opposed oppositions on the basis such things would hurt inventors.
Of course, once damages apportionment went away, and the Coalition for Patent Fairness packed up and went home, one saw that the patent quality issue was a smokescreen, merely a prop for a different agenda.
posted by Lawrence B. Ebert at 9:21 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home