|
|
|
|
|
|
by gfodor
5645 days ago
|
|
|
His point is that people who read the abstract to a patent and declare that it's not novel are making the people who actually read the patent and come to the same conclusion look bad. The abstract is not the patent. It's not meant to be the patent. It's not a legally binding part of the patent. So talking about it in a way that refers to its novelty is just as useful as talking about the novelty of the typeface they used or the brand of paper they used. |
|
|