[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
Neil Williams wrote: > However, check out claim 9, as Clive said on IRC, for the patent > attorney to include it in the first place is cunning; for the inventor > to miss it is careless and embarassing for them; but for the attorney > to leave it in when filing is just broken. However the clincher is that > for the patent clerk to have passed this just indicates how little care > is taken and how one can probably get just anything patented if it’s > hidden in the midst of a load of legalese. Some people clearly just turn up so they can get paid, not so they can put in quality work. The attorney needs his head read, preferably with a heavy blunt object, while the patent clerk needs to be shown the door with the advice 'don't let it hit your bum on the way out!' Kind regards, Julian -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html