IRC: #techbytes @ FreeNode: Monday, April 26, 2021

> @https://twitter.com/bastianbest

schestowitz__

-TechBytesBot/#techbytes- ( status 400 @ https://mobile.twitter.com/bastianbest )

> <http://click.revue.email/ss/c/2fVGm-9a_FyZubtxRY0IlshmxDMajLYguJkzIWmPnd5YvzyLw3h0N_VkTYGcaH98/3bd/nNNFn_O4TbSgb42kqxiqmg/h1/H0TW2i2035YRISjOiOOK5MB15WisB_etc-7mEqqAdX8>

schestowitz__

schestowitz__

schestowitz__

> Corporate patent managers often tell me that they have a hard time

schestowitz__

> getting invention disclosures out of the developers. If that’s the case,

schestowitz__

> I suspect that the company’s innovation strategy is more or less “bottom

schestowitz__

> up”, i.e. the company waits for the developers to come up with

schestowitz__

> innovations that are worth patenting.

schestowitz__

> On the other hand, some companies take more of a “top down” approach.

schestowitz__

> They have a clear innovation roadmap and tell their developers where to

schestowitz__

> invent things so that IP rights can be generated in the right place.

schestowitz__

> *What does the ideal strategy look like?* Hit reply and let me know!

schestowitz__

Re: Fwd: Top down, bottom up or both?

schestowitz__

> Wtf

schestowitz__

He's full of it.

x https://today.rtl.lu/news/world/a/1711657.html

schestowitz__

-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-today.rtl.lu | RTL Today - Video interview: Bill Gates "hopeful" the world will be "back to normal" by end of 2022

schestowitz__

# bill sez

x https://www.helsinkitimes.fi/business/19105-should-you-still-invest-in-bitcoin-in-2021.html

schestowitz__

schestowitz__

# cites His Billness as authority on the topic, or for that matter any topic

-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-www.helsinkitimes.fi | Should you still invest in Bitcoin in 2021

x https://www.computerworld.com/article/3614195/4-steps-to-repair-microsoft-office.html

schestowitz__

-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-www.computerworld.com | 4 steps to repair Microsoft Office | Computerworld

schestowitz__

# the story should be "replace" instead

*GNUmoon (~GNUmoon@gateway/tor-sasl/gnumoon) has joined #techbytes

Apr 26 09:39

*libertybox has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)

*libertybox__ (~schestowi@2a00:23c4:c3aa:7d01:b9:28c5:9644:99af) has joined #techbytes

*acer-box__ (~acer-box@2a00:23c4:c3aa:7d01:b9:28c5:9644:99af) has joined #techbytes

*acer-box__ has quit (Changing host)

*acer-box__ (~acer-box@unaffiliated/schestowitz) has joined #techbytes

*Techrights-sec2 (~quassel@2a00:23c4:c3aa:7d01:b9:28c5:9644:99af) has joined #techbytes

http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2021/04/board-of-appeal-relies-on-its-own-cgk.html?showComment=1619263465160#c1046189907136786817

*acer-box has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)

Apr 26 10:08

*libertybox_ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)

Apr 26 10:10

*Techrights-sec has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)

Apr 26 10:10

*GNUmoon has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)

Apr 26 10:42

schestowitz__

-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-ipkitten.blogspot.com | Board of Appeal relies on its own CGK to support an inventive step objection without remittal to first instance (T 1370/15) - The IPKat

schestowitz__

schestowitz__

@ Anonymous of Thursday, 22 April 2021 at 15:12:00 BST

schestowitz__

I beg to disagree and a more differentiated view is in my humble opinion necessary. Art 84 is to primarily be applied at the EPO. Examination should be such that any claim granted by the EPO should be clear, concise and supported by the description.

schestowitz__

Should this aim not have been reached, then Art 69 comes into play. The fact that Art 69 exists does not mean that clarity is to be diluted from the start and that we should from the start take the description into account.

schestowitz__

The problem is that too many examiners do not give a damn about clarity in all its most important aspects, i.e. clarity in its original sense and support by the description. Be it only due to the fact that any claim above 15 has a cost, money is a good incitation to be concise.

schestowitz__

I would go as far as to say that if a claim is not clear by itself then how on Earth is it possible to say that its subject-matter is at all novel or inventive. I said it before, do not be surprised that with a woolly claim you face objections of lack of novelty or inventive step. But please do not come with the excuse that when you look at the description your woolly claim is crystal clear and the lack of patentability is not

schestowitz__

justified. If it is so crystal clear when one looks at the description, then why not bring it in the claim.

schestowitz__

The BA are right when they state in general that Art 69 is not for the EPO, but mainly for post grant procedures.

schestowitz__

It is not acceptable for a BA to merely allege what is common general knowledge. If it is really such common knowledge, then it would have been easy for the BA to give a source.

schestowitz__

It creates a dangerous precedent as the BA have a very large discretion. The BA had the discretion to decide that it was not obliged to give a source for the so-called common general knowledge, but there is no instance to check that the discretion has been correctly exercised. The BA check whether the first instance has correctly exercised its discretion, but which body decides that a BA has correctly exercised its discretion: none!

schestowitz__

We are confronted her with the original default of the EPO system. No revision instance. The EPC 2000 has improved the situation by introducing Art 112a, but the EBA does only deal with procedural defects. The exercise of discretion might prima facie look formal, but can also touch substance. Whether a document is prima facie relevant is not a mere question of form, one has to look at the substance.

schestowitz__

The absence of a check on how a BA has exercised its discretion looks more and more necessary in view of the dwindling independence of the BA. But this a different topic.

schestowitz__

*GNUmoon (~GNUmoon@gateway/tor-sasl/gnumoon) has joined #techbytes

Apr 26 12:21

schestowitz__

>>> FYI

schestowitz__

>>>

>>> https://logs.sylnt.us/%23soylent/2021-04-23.html

schestowitz__

-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-logs.sylnt.us | #soylent | Logs for 2021-04-23

schestowitz__

schestowitz__

>> I think what's worth seeing there is how they surgically remove an

schestowitz__

>> editor behind his or her back. Very dishonourable.

schestowitz__

schestowitz__

> Yep, though that editor is also whining against RMS. The whole day's

schestowitz__

> worth of logs should be read.

schestowitz__

That would take a lot of time :-)

schestowitz__

> Also, it looks a little like the tactics that were in the early stages

schestowitz__

> of use against the TR IRC channel.

schestowitz__

And Slashdot.

schestowitz__

> Also, it looks a little like the tactics that were in the early stages

schestowitz__

> of use against the TR IRC channel.

schestowitz__

schestowitz__

> OK, I can see it now.

schestowitz__

1) ./ dies when Commander Taco left

schestowitz__

2) they tried another routine against FSF, 'reforming' it to be 'moderate' by removing the founder

schestowitz__

3) IRC in TR is quiet now, so I can focus on what's more important, s/n ratio higher

schestowitz__

If something happens to me, you're in charge.

https://twitter.com/Siemens/status/1386607637765177347

schestowitz__

Apr 26 17:52

-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-@Siemens: #copyright or #opensource? Both have their benefits! For #WorldIPDay, we asked Beat Weibel, head of our #patent dep… https://t.co/FDfrMGpIxw

Apr 26 17:53

-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-@Siemens: #copyright or #opensource? Both have their benefits! For #WorldIPDay, we asked Beat Weibel, head of our #patent dep… https://t.co/FDfrMGpIxw

Apr 26 17:53

schestowitz__

LOL. #copyright or #opensource .. Coca-Cola or beverage.

Apr 26 17:53

*liberty_box has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)

Apr 26 17:54

*rianne__ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)

Apr 26 17:54

*rianne__ (~rianne@host81-154-169-167.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) has joined #techbytes

Apr 26 18:01

*liberty_box (~liberty@host81-154-169-167.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) has joined #techbytes

Apr 26 18:01

*rianne__ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)

Apr 26 18:06

*liberty_box has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)

Apr 26 18:06

*rianne__ (~rianne@host81-154-169-167.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) has joined #techbytes

Apr 26 18:08

*liberty_box (~liberty@host81-154-169-167.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) has joined #techbytes

Apr 26 18:10

schestowitz__

>>> Also, it looks a little like the tactics that were in the early stages

Apr 26 18:34

schestowitz__

>>> of use against the TR IRC channel.

Apr 26 18:34

schestowitz__

Apr 26 18:34

schestowitz__

>> And Slashdot.

schestowitz__

schestowitz__

> It's working against some of the key editors and one of the co-founders.

schestowitz__

> https://logs.sylnt.us/%23soylent/2021-04-23.html#18:38:36

schestowitz__

-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-logs.sylnt.us | #soylent | Logs for 2021-04-23

schestowitz__

schestowitz__

> M$ and interest backing M$ would like any independent site like SN to go

schestowitz__

> away. It would be very hard to prove, but those interests are probably

schestowitz__

> directly behind the behaviors grinding away at staff.

schestowitz__

I remember when they published a link to Microsoft lies at CBS/'Tech'Republic (about "Linux").

schestowitz__

>> OK, I can see it now.

schestowitz__

schestowitz__

>> 1) ./ dies when Commander Taco left

schestowitz__

>> 2) they tried another routine against FSF, 'reforming' it to be

schestowitz__

>> 'moderate' by removing the founder

schestowitz__

> Yep. Getting rid of the founder has been used a lot the last few years.

schestowitz__

schestowitz__

>> 3) IRC in TR is quiet now, so I can focus on what's more important, s/n

schestowitz__

>> ratio higher

schestowitz__

> +1

schestowitz__

schestowitz__

>> If something happens to me, you're in charge.

schestowitz__

schestowitz__

> Better to build in more redundancy.

schestowitz__

As in, IPFS and stuff?