On 5/1/24 13:19, nix via agora-discussion wrote: >>> I intend to award Employee of the Year to snail and Janet. >> I object, sorry. I think these need to be phrased as separate intents. >> > I don't think that's true. The rule text says awardable to "the > persons", plural. Nothing indicates it cannot be awarded to multiple > people, and overall patent titles can belong to entities (and the joint > of two players is still an entity). The semantic difference is whether > there's one title jointly awarded to both of you (which I think this > implies), or two separate titles for each of you.
It's certainly possible to do, but I don't think we have previously had a patent title being (deliberately) awarded to a set of persons (under the legal definition, so excluding the instance with BC System), and I don't think we should start. At the very least, it'd likely cause confusion in the Herald's report? In any event, I don't think the intent specifies that clearly enough to meet the tabled action standard. -- Janet Cobb Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
