Norm, (revisiting the patent questions)
Hi Norm. I was perusing the web and found an interesting site that provides information on patents. Your perspicuous observation pasted below (from referenced post) is certainly correct.
"There's an analogy here to GRNO's patent applications--they clearly can't patent general petrochemical cracking and distillation processes which have been in use in the industry for over 90 years. Hence all the back and forth communications with the patent reviewers aimed at carefully identifying, clarifying, and limiting the specific innovations for which they are trying to claim patent rights."
The following is pasted from a section of the URL listed below.
____________________
c Copyright 1993-1996 Oppedahl & Larson.
Disclaimer: This is not legal advice. Click for information on the purpose of this page.
If one has invented a novel and unobvious algorithm or piece of computer software, and wishes to obtain patent protection, then one's next step should be to consult one or more patent attorneys or patent agents who are experienced in getting patents on inventions having algorithms or software in them. The law (in the U.S.) is settled that the mere presence of software in an invention does not automatically render it unpatentable. It is commonplace for inventors to obtain patents in inventions composed largely or nearly entirely of software. In the opinion of Oppedahl & Larson, many of the well-known cases in the Patent Office Board of Appeals, and many of the well-known cases in the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in which the patentability of a software-related invention was contested, are instances not of inventions that were unpatentable subject matter, but rather are instances in which the parties got caught up in disputes over the wording and style of the pending claims. Our view is that inventors have been getting strong patent protection for software-intensive inventions for decades, essentially by being thoughtful about the wording and claim-drafting style of the patent applications. Prosecution of software-intensive patent applications tends to take longer than prosecution of some other types of patent applications, for the simple reason that the examining groups handling the former tend to have large backlogs. The Patent Office has recently proposed to change its rules regarding what is patentable in connection with software, and this is discussed in the Oppedahl & Larson News. The USPTO web site provides the draft Examination Guidelines for Computer-Related Inventions.
____________________
patents.com
Of course GRNO is aware of the jewel Pete and all are perfecting and no doubt are pursuing the protection of their invention through the appropriate legal channels. I imagine GRNO has valid patent claims on the process and the program/operating system that controls the process.
Update on the hats/shirts. Plenty of hats should be available at the meeting for those interested. The shirts are not as certain due to size considerations, coordination with vendor, etc. Another thought is people may rather have shirts showing the TM Green Oasis logo found on the web site. Coordination and permission from BC may be in order and my opinion is that it might be nice to have the logo vice stock symbol on the shirts. I am concentrating on availability at the meeting and will sort out everthing else thereafter. For those of you that expressed your appreciation of my efforts via email, thanks, but beware the chicken has yet to hatch and I'm losing my hairline fast!!!! <vbg>
Bye for now,
LLLP Mark |
