[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: The patent process [Was Re: Sharing the Family PC is Patent-Pending]

From: Barry Margolin
Subject: Re: The patent process [Was Re: Sharing the Family PC is Patent-Pending]
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 08:49:42 -0400
User-agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.4 (PPC Mac OS X)

In article <Xns94E6E793BEE71elektrosmdonet@>,
 Alun <> wrote:

> It's hard to be precise, but much harder to do it plain language, and I say 
> that from experience. And, no it's not technical precision that's required. 
> The claims define the monopoly, and that's a legal matter, not a technical 
> one.

But shouldn't this be defined in terms of the technical features, and 
hence use language that would be meaningful to technical professionals?

> The abstract is the place to give a good technical summary, but there 
> isn't much downside to writing a bad one, plus you can use the same one for 
> a number of related inventions.

We've always been told that the abstract doesn't matter.

If a technical person is going to make any use of patents, shouldn't 
they be able to understand them?  If the understandable part is the 
abstract, but it doesn't really say the same thing as the claims, they 
could be led down the garden path, thinking that they're not infringing.

Barry Margolin,
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]