=> back to Techrights (Main Index)
00:02 *Noisytoot has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s)
00:12 *Noisytoot (~noisytoot@tkbibjhmbkvb8.irc) has joined #techbytes
00:19 *Noisytoot has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s)
00:27 *Noisytoot (~noisytoot@tkbibjhmbkvb8.irc) has joined #techbytes
00:39 *jacobk (~quassel@tim33ghqw8zx4.irc) has joined #techbytes
01:00 *jacobk has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s)
01:07 schestowitz; http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2023/08/adding-matter-by-amending-description.html?showComment=1691488190066#c5852620945846337999
01:07 -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-ipkitten.blogspot.com | Adding matter by amending the description to exclude embodiments (Ensygnia v Shell [2023] EWHC 1495 (Pat)) - The IPKat
01:07 schestowitz; "As has been pointed out elsewhere, this case is nothing to do with the EPO. The titile in this article could be more aptly named Proprietor by own free will attempts to contort claim 1 via description amendments after grant to cover infringement asserted. The proprietor amended claim 1 as granted to include in in its scope a static sign (such as a poster). The description is not helpful to this interpretation so
01:07 schestowitz; is changed to say an electronic display with sign is outside the scope of the claims. The proprietor was successful in forcing their interpretation but got burned since application as filed and patent as granted did not support such an interpretation. Isnt this the type of gamesmanship we should all want to avoid? If I read the B spec and decide I am safe, I am not going to be happy going to court to defend a
01:07 schestowitz; gainst a C spec of the type above, even if the claimant loses. Those against the EPOs approach (as well meaning as it may or may not be, and legal basis aside) can no longer point to the authority of the claims and dismiss the possibility that a proprietor wont seriously argue a claimed feature can be wished away in view of the description. Is there a middle ground where proprietors have the courtesy of tel
01:07 schestowitz; ling the public what the rough scope of their invention may be?"
01:08 schestowitz; http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2023/08/adding-matter-by-amending-description.html?showComment=1691484607580#c137661347626590676
01:08 -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-ipkitten.blogspot.com | Adding matter by amending the description to exclude embodiments (Ensygnia v Shell [2023] EWHC 1495 (Pat)) - The IPKat
01:08 schestowitz; "This case report puts me in mind of The Law of Unintended Consequences. I understand that the EPO crusade to "conform" the description strictly to the allowable claims was prompted by its unhappiness with the UK Supreme Court's decision (on what amounts to an infringing "equivalent") in the pemetrexed litigation. Somehow the thinking inside the EPO developed into a view that insisting on strict "con
01:08 schestowitz; formity" would pump up legal certainty, and streamline and shorten court proceedings, in the rare event of a recalcitrant party nevertheless insisting on bringing their patent dispute before a judge.In the real world, however, the very FIRST thing an accused infringer has always looked at, in a patent granted under the EPC, is whether the Applicant made any amendment at all after the filing date. Why, because there lies
01:08 schestowitz; a uniquely attractive "pressure point" that can be used like no other, to squeeze a submission out of the patent owner. With its present obsession on strict "conformity" the EPO is multiplying the number of such pressure points and thereby multiplying the complexity and cost of patent disputes, and increasing rather than reducing levels of uncertainty as to the outcome. Of course one should always constr
01:08 schestowitz; ue the claim in the light of the description. That much is a no-brainer, and done all over the world. But other jurisdictions don't insist like the EPO on strict conformity. Instead they take it in their stride, that the description is what Applicant described as their invention on the filing date of the application. That is the "context" relative to which one construes the words chosen by the Applicant to define their inventi
01:08 schestowitz; on, the subject of their patent application. The judges want and need to factor that thought in to their analysis of what the duly issued claim shall be deemed to include within its scope of protection. The pemetrexed case might indeed be a good example of claim construction as intended under the EPC. Time will tell.But anyway, it seems to me that the pemetrexed case fails as justification for the argument that less than per
01:08 schestowitz; fect "conformity" is the cause of in wrong decisions in court.It is said that the EPO finds attractive its insistence on strict "conformity" because it is a way to increase EPO profits. I find that puzzling. I should have thought that profit-hungry EPO management might rather prefer dumping the insistence on strict "conformity" and then telling its Examiners that, with this shift, Examiners ough
01:08 schestowitz; t to be able to double the number of case disposals they deliver each year. What do other readers think?"
01:19 schestowitz; <tmg1|michelson> hi
01:19 schestowitz; <tmg1|michelson> been missing you on the fediverse ;)
01:19 schestowitz; <tmg1|michelson> not alone in that either
01:19 schestowitz; fediverse does not seem to have a future
02:05 *jacobk (~quassel@ebfh29ushc8x8.irc) has joined #techbytes
02:10 *Noisytoot has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s)
02:11 *Noisytoot (~noisytoot@tkbibjhmbkvb8.irc) has joined #techbytes
02:14 *Noisytoot has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s)
02:15 *Noisytoot (~noisytoot@tkbibjhmbkvb8.irc) has joined #techbytes
03:05 *MinceR gives voice to liberty_box u-amarsh04 libertybox__
03:05 *MinceR gives voice to rianne schestowitz viera
03:05 *MinceR gives voice to schestowitz-TR XFaCE libertybox_
03:05 *MinceR gives voice to tool jacobk Techrights-sec
03:05 *MinceR gives voice to libertybox roy_ psydruid
03:05 *MinceR gives voice to GNUmoon2 Noisytoot TechBytesBot
03:05 *MinceR gives voice to liberty_box_ techrights[sec]_
03:05 *MinceR sets mode +m #techbytes
03:36 *u-amarsh04 has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
03:41 *u-amarsh04 (~amarsh04@h9w2ackdz5nh2.irc) has joined #techbytes
03:42 *MinceR gives voice to u-amarsh04
05:32 *rsheftel14357 (~rsheftel@freenode-sle.jn3.t23bea.IP) has joined #techbytes
05:33 *rsheftel1435 has quit (Ping timeout: 120 seconds)
05:35 *rsheftel1435 (~rsheftel@freenode-sle.jn3.t23bea.IP) has joined #techbytes
05:36 *rsheftel14357 has quit (Ping timeout: 120 seconds)
07:08 *Noisytoot has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s)
07:11 *Noisytoot (~noisytoot@tkbibjhmbkvb8.irc) has joined #techbytes
07:24 *Noisytoot has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s)
07:32 *Noisytoot (~noisytoot@tkbibjhmbkvb8.irc) has joined #techbytes
07:44 *Noisytoot has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s)
07:55 *Noisytoot (~noisytoot@tkbibjhmbkvb8.irc) has joined #techbytes
09:04 *Noisytoot has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s)
09:06 *Noisytoot (~noisytoot@tkbibjhmbkvb8.irc) has joined #techbytes
09:09 *Noisytoot has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s)
09:16 *Noisytoot (~noisytoot@tkbibjhmbkvb8.irc) has joined #techbytes
10:24 *MinceR gives voice to Noisytoot
11:58 schestowitz; x https://ubuntu.com//blog/announcing-in-place-upgrade-from-ubuntu-server-to-ubuntu-pro-on-azure
=> ↺ https://ubuntu.com//blog/announcing-in-place-upgrade-from-ubuntu-server-to-ubuntu-pro-on-azure
11:58 schestowitz; # did not click
11:58 -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-Announcing In-Place Upgrade from Ubuntu Server to Ubuntu Pro on Azure | Ubuntu
11:58 schestowitz; x https://blog.ledger.com/ssh-with-tpm/
=> ↺ https://blog.ledger.com/ssh-with-tpm/
11:58 -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-blog.ledger.com | Protecting SSH keys with TPM 2.0, now available on Debian
11:58 schestowitz; x https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/bill-gates-used-to-think-this-habit-was-unnecessary-but-now-its-super-important-4280148
11:58 -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-www.ndtv.com | Bill Gates Used To Think This Habit Was "Unnecessary", But Now It's "Super Important"
14:54 *Noisytoot has quit (Quit: ZNC 1.8.2 - https://znc.in)
14:55 *Noisytoot (~noisytoot@tkbibjhmbkvb8.irc) has joined #techbytes
16:20 *jacobk has quit (connection closed)
16:36 *jacobk (~quassel@ebfh29ushc8x8.irc) has joined #techbytes
16:36 *MinceR gives voice to jacobk Noisytoot
17:00 *Noisytoot has quit (Quit: ZNC 1.8.2 - https://znc.in)
17:00 *Noisytoot (~noisytoot@tkbibjhmbkvb8.irc) has joined #techbytes
17:04 *MinceR gives voice to Noisytoot
17:43 schestowitz; <tmg1|michelson> on the contrary, it's only grown since you left, especially now w ith threads on it
17:46 schestowitz; Mastodon temporarily flourished because of "X", but it won't last long IMHO
21:31 *jacobk has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s)
21:31 *jacobk (~quassel@ebfh29ushc8x8.irc) has joined #techbytes
21:32 *MinceR gives voice to jacobk
=> back to Techrights (Main Index) This content has been proxied by September (ba2dc).Proxy Information
text/gemini;lang=en-GB