●● IRC: #techbytes @ Techrights IRC Network: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 ●● ● Feb 18 [01:51] *psydruid (~psydruid@jevhxkzmtrbww.irc) has left #techbytes [01:56] *psydruid (~psydruid@jevhxkzmtrbww.irc) has joined #techbytes ● Feb 18 [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] "" [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] I'm on a PIP and will be laid off. [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] Usually one or the other, no? [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] 2 hours ago by Anonymous [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] | 1 reaction (+0/-1) [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] Post ID: @ce+1jma1j24p [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] Hopefully you are really wanting to work instead of needing to work if you are over retirement age since if you still need the money and didnt save and invest well over the years then thats on you [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] 2 hours ago by Anonymous [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] | no reactions [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] Post ID: @cd+1jma1j24p [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] Its not clear why you think you dont belong on PIP. You need to have full proof of that. Not sure why you mention disability and being at retirement age, neither gives you a free pass, Trust me I know. [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] 3 hours ago by Anonymous [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] | 1 reaction (+1/-0) [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] Post ID: @c9+1jma1j24p [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] As someone who KNOWS, DO NOT go with Lichton & Liss-Riordan PC [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] I highly suggest Wright & Greenhill in Austin TX. They currently have a lawsuit in NY City for this. [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] At the very least, interview them first. [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] 5 hours ago by Think before you sign [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] | 2 reactions (+2/-0) [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] Post ID: @bv+1jma1j24p [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] If youre going to fight, you better have documentation. Emails, witnesses, notes, dates, a paper trail. [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] You should find a lawyer in your state, as employment laws vary greatly by state. The lawyer will also determine whether you have grounds to file a complaint with the EEOC. You should know, though, that under this administration, the EEOC, which was already pretty neutered, is being gutted as we speak. No one is protected now. If anything, people are now being threatened with persecution for not being bigoted enough in engaging wit [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] h their fellow humans. [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] IBM also does not care even if you have evidence of Alvind himself SAing an employee in the supply closet in Armonk. IBM has an army of attorneys just to fight wrongful termination claims. [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] Its not about the rightness or merit of your claims; we live in a world where there is a profound imbalance of power, and its about to get exponentially worse because a lot of people voted for their own oppression and to remove the guardrails, to make powerful people above the law, even as they complain about how terrible it is and are negatively impacted by it directly. [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] Divorces are also expensive. Even if you get a settlement, and thats a big IF, it will mostly be the lawyers who get the spoils. [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] Youre over retirement age? Be glad you lasted as long as you did. [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] Not trying to dissuade you, but go in with your eyes open. Good luck. [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] 6 hours ago by Anonymous [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] | 2 reactions (+1/-1) [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] Post ID: @bs+1jma1j24p [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] Lichton & Liss-Riordan PC [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] " [04:55] schestowitz[TR2] https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1jma1j24p [04:56] -TechBytesBot/#techbytes- ( status 403 @ https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1jma1j24p ) [04:59] schestowitz[TR2] https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1jmaj5zq3 [04:59] -TechBytesBot/#techbytes- ( status 403 @ https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1jmaj5zq3 ) ● Feb 18 [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] " [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] Stock Awards [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] Someone posted in the GDP Thread but if nobody saw, Alvind got over 325,000 shares valued at almost $255 a share [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] His Pipmunks like Kavanaugh got over 143K shares [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] I get it C suite staff get the perks but this is greed especially when they cry the blues when its time for our compensation [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] " [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] " [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] and the interesting posting and remarks about DEI at IBM seems to have disappeared. Seems that someone wants to change the clock back after the posting struck a raw nerve....LOL ! [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] Was it Alvind or one of his Pipmunks ? Someone is awfully sensitive when it comes to DEI and keeping the DEI flame burning at IBM. Raises and promotions should be based on merit .... [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] 5 hours ago by Anonymous [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] | 1 reaction (+1/-0) [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] Post ID: @b0+1jmaj5zq3 [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] +3 [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] They are looters and they will loot as much as they can until they are out. [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] 7 hours ago by Anonymous [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] | 5 reactions (+4/-1) [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] Post ID: @ap+1jmaj5zq3 [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] +3 [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] I get Alvind is highly intelligent I think hes got a PhD but at the end hes a puppet for shareholders. Even though hes arrogant he sounds smart [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] But Kavanaugh? Holy smokes what an absolute dunderhead [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] He gets 37 million to tell people to learn more skills while he cuts T&O to pieces [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] 7 hours ago by Anonymous [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] | 3 reactions (+3/-0) [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] Post ID: @an+1jmaj5zq3 [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] +3 [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] their primary goal is not to produce great products but to produce [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] high share prices which is how they get wealthier [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] those 2 goals are not perfectly aligned [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] 8 hours ago by Anonymous [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] | 3 reactions (+3/-0) [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] Post ID: @ad+1jmaj5zq3 [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] +3 [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] The stock buyback effort keeps the share price high. [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] Who can trust a company that have a $ 60 Billion debt, when It is yearly revenue barely exceeds $ 60 Billion. [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] Bankruptcy is looming, Creditors will get it for cheap. [05:00] schestowitz[TR2] "' ● Feb 18 [09:02] *jacobk has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s) [09:04] *jacobk (~quassel@syp65ggum2ibk.irc) has joined #techbytes ● Feb 18 [11:51] *schestowitz-TR has quit (Quit: Konversation term) [11:51] *schestowitz-TR has quit (Quit: Konversation term) [11:51] *schestowitz-TR (~acer-box@jcfiaarnjjqje.irc) has joined #techbytes [11:51] *schestowitz-TR (~acer-box@freenode/user/schestowitz) has joined #techbytes [11:57] *schestowitz-TR has quit (Quit: Konversation term) [11:57] *schestowitz-TR has quit (Quit: Konversation term) [11:57] *schestowitz-TR (~acer-box@jcfiaarnjjqje.irc) has joined #techbytes [11:57] *schestowitz-TR (~acer-box@freenode/user/schestowitz) has joined #techbytes ● Feb 18 [13:34] *psydroid3 (~psydroid@8p6k6zizq5nqc.irc) has joined #techbytes ● Feb 18 [14:16] *x-amarsh04 has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s) [14:18] *x-amarsh04 (~amarsh04@h5zkbfemmwig6.irc) has joined #techbytes [14:50] *croissant has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s) [14:55] *psydruid (~psydruid@jevhxkzmtrbww.irc) has left #techbytes [14:56] *schestowitz-TR has quit (Quit: Konversation term) [14:56] *schestowitz-TR has quit (Quit: Konversation term) [14:56] *schestowitz-TR (~acer-box@jcfiaarnjjqje.irc) has joined #techbytes [14:56] *schestowitz-TR (~acer-box@freenode/user/schestowitz) has joined #techbytes [14:58] *psydruid (~psydruid@jevhxkzmtrbww.irc) has joined #techbytes ● Feb 18 [15:02] *schestowitz-TR has quit (Quit: Konversation term) [15:02] *schestowitz-TR has quit (Quit: Konversation term) [15:02] *schestowitz-TR (~acer-box@jcfiaarnjjqje.irc) has joined #techbytes [15:02] *schestowitz-TR (~acer-box@freenode/user/schestowitz) has joined #techbytes [15:22] *croissant (~croissant@6q7dd3vuaf9b6.irc) has joined #techbytes [15:37] *croissant has quit (connection closed) [15:37] *croissant (~croissant@6q7dd3vuaf9b6.irc) has joined #techbytes [15:49] *croissant has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s) ● Feb 18 [17:46] schestowitz[TR2] Re: Fwd: UPC publishes first annual report! [17:47] schestowitz[TR2] > The first annual report of the Unified Patent Court [17:47] schestowitz[TR2] > (UPC) is out! [17:47] -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-www.unified-patent-court.org | Unified Patent Court published its first annual report | Unified Patent Court ● Feb 18 [18:53] schestowitz[TR2] http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2025/02/ebas-preliminary-opinion-in-g124.html?showComment=1739806091872#c1080595429502343439 [18:53] -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-ipkitten.blogspot.com | EBA's preliminary opinion in G1/24: "the description and the figures can be referred to in the course of claim interpretation" - The IPKat [18:53] schestowitz[TR2] "Francis, your comments on Q3 prompt an obvious question: what are the rules that the EPO should follow in order to determine the "ordinary meaning" of a term?

The problem here is that, if the patent monopoly cannot (always) be its own dictionary, then a replacement dictionary is required. Whilst this might not appear to be a difficult problem to solve, it is important to remember that appearances can be decept [18:53] schestowitz[TR2] ive.

For example, does the EPO need to take account of the particular (sub-)field of technology? If so, how do they determine the "ordinary meaning" for that (sub-)field? Also, what allowances should the EPO make for the fact that established (or "ordinary") meanings of terms can evolve over time? For example, should the EPO aim to establish meaning(s) at the priority or filing date, and ignore any su [18:53] schestowitz[TR2] bsequent shifts in "ordinary" meaning? If so, should the EPO do the same for terms used in the prior art?

Another question: once the EPO has determined the "ordinary meaning" of a term, are they obliged to show their working, including providing documentary evidence that supports the meaning(s) that the EPO has established are "ordinary" for the terms in question? If not, how are the parties [18:53] schestowitz[TR2] to the proceedings meant to keep the EPO on the straight and narrow on the occasions where the ED, OD or Board of Appeal has not got everything 100% correct?" ● Feb 18 [20:37] *psydroid3 has quit (Quit: KVIrc 5.2.6 Quasar http://www.kvirc.net/)