View Single Post
Old 11-03-2003, 01:26 PM  
FightThisPatent
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 4,090
Quote:
Originally posted by keyman

If I was to build an embodiment from the patent documents, I would have to include all claims, unless specified otherwise. Leaving out any of the components of the invention would render it to be a different embodiment to the described invention.

You are correct.. and unfortunately, Fight The Patent Foundation is only but a concept, so I can't hire my own team of patent law experts to address these issues... but I am sure that the Defense team (F&R) for the defendants are looking at all the claims and knocking them down one by one.

The existance of prior art does help to show the eventual judge and jury in the most simplistic non-technical way, that what Acacia is claiming has already been done by those prior to 1990.

Like an onion, there are many layers to have to peal away, with no one layer being just the end.

This is why i can see why cases like SightSound vs CDNOW/BMG is in it's 7th year and they finally won the right to go to Summary Judgement (for those keeping track at home, SightSound = bad).


Fight the Patent!
__________________

http://www.t3report.com
(where's the traffic?) v5.0 is out! |
http://www.FightThePatent.com
| ICQ 52741957
FightThisPatent is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote