IANAL as well but the courts seemed to have changed the definition of "obvious".
http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2013/01/the-federal-circuits-new-obviousness-jurisprudence-an-empirical-study.html If you look at these obvious patents you'll see that it doesn't even mean obvious to the layman or even a child. http://www.freepatentsonline.com/crazy.html This patent I believe was only filed to show how silly all this has actually become. http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6994809.html On 06/27/2013 05:18 PM, Kenneth Lerman wrote: > IANAL, > > But as far as I know, the only part of a patent that *really* matters is > the claims. So even though the description seems obvious, the claims > might say something like: where the insulator is made of pure > unobtainium. That might be non-obvious. > > Ken > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: Build for Windows Store. http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
