To all:
______________
Following is the posting Jeff has been trying to forward:
__________________________________________________________
Greg Aharonian has been one of E-data's more vocal critics and was
quoted in BW and other places. He was unhappy with Arnold's
characterization of him in his response to BW, so he posted a whiny
complaint (see below). The response to his complaint comes from R. P.
Bell, a patent attorney, who clearly doesn't take Aharonian's expertise too
seriously. Enjoy it!
There's a saying that you can judge the quality of a person (company?) by
the nature of his (its) enemies. If that's so, I think it speaks well of both
Arnold and E-data to consider some of those aligned against them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: PATNEWS: E-data posts <truth> about me on the Internet
From: Robert P. Bell <RobertBell@BELLPAT.COM>
Date: 1996/07/27
Message-Id: <4td9h0$dj7@lex.zippo.com>
References: <Duz9Cn.2L7@world.std.com>
Organization: Robert Platt Bell & Associates, P.C.
Newsgroups: misc.int-Property
In article <Duz9Cn.2L7@world.std.com>, srctran@world.std.com says...
>
>!19960723 E-data posts lies about me on the Internet
>
> Last week, Business Week ran a critical article about the E-data patent
>activities. It was a critical article, based on the prior art history of
>the Telephone Software Connection. I was quoted in the article, along with
>a few other people.
> Apparently (though not unexpectedly), the people at E-data are very upset
>about the article, and have posted to their Web site a letter they have sent
>to Business Week complaining about the article.
> As a measure of the questionable character of the E-data people, one of
>the paragraphs of E-data's letter makes false accusations of my activities
>and my opinions, as follows:
>
>
> 7. Mr. Aharonian, cited as an objective authority, is actually a
> zealous opponent of the patent process and of software patents, in
> particular. BW did not disclose in its article that he wrote to me
> several months ago about his involvement with defendants in our
> lawsuits. A copy of his e-mail was supplied to BW by Mr. Fink.
>
So, where are the lies? ;) Seriously, though, Greg, you need to be a little
more thick-skinned. For starters, posting this diatribe makes you look like
the paranoid kook they are accusing you of being.
Secondly, they are RIGHT in that you are not an impartial source. Your gadfly
quotes in various articles have generally been entirely wrong on almost every
aspect of patent law (e.g., the search room will be obsolete soon).
Moreover, you are a self-appointed "expert" in patent law, with no background or
training whatsoever - no Examining experience, no registration number, no law
school. Your "credentials", if we may call them that, are of being an "on-line"
searcher and having a coupled of applications filed.
Sorry, but I don't take legal advice from patent searchers or give any
significant weight to the opinions of same about patent law or litigation
(unless of course, they have some level of experience).
You little newsletter is amusing - keep it up. But your credibility slips
every time you bash the patent system, the PTO, patent lawyers (your clients,
last time I checked, but we've had this discussion before!).
Take the agents' exam - go to law school - whatever. But stop passing
yourself off as an expert - it only serves to discredit what you say.
Chill,
--Bob. |
