|
|
|
|
|
by overbroad
4999 days ago
|
|
What are those acronyms developers like to use? rtfm, utsl, etc.? :) There is a link to the court rules in the article. This is the definitive source, besides knowing clerks personally. There is some cynicism in this thread about whether this rehearing will amount to anything but I think this shows the system is definitely aware of what the media is saying about software patents, and what you are saying in online forums. Does the USPTO read stackexchange? I think we all know the answer to that. You have the right idea. Make your voice heard. |
|
If you are indeed a lawyer, would you (or any other lawyer here) be willing to draft a template that software engineers can customize (the interest section), sign, and mail to the court?
Bilski v Kappos is a case that dealt with similar subject matter. The FSF[2], SFLC[3], Red Hat[4], and Google [5] filed amicus curiae briefs lamenting software patents. Surely there is something reusable here, especially from Red Hat pages 12-19.
[1] (see pages 56-57) http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/rules-of-practic...
[2] http://endsoftpatents.org/amicus-bilski-2009
[3] http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2009/bilski-amicus-...
[4] http://www.groklaw.net/images/BilskiRedHatSCbrief.pdf
[5] http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publishing/previe...