|
|
|
|
|
by seldo
4710 days ago
|
|
I understand how prior disclosure works, my confusion is that nothing like that seems to have happened here. The patent was invalidated on the basis of documentation of a different piece of software with the same features released 5 years prior (albeit by the same company). However, having read the ruling, I see it explicitly cites the prior-disclosure rule. So the bad patent system has invalidated a bad patent, but in a bad way. |
|