(ℹ) Join us now at the IRC channel | ䷉ Find the plain text version at this address (HTTP) or in Gemini (how to use Gemini) with a full GemText version.
| *jacobk has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s) | Mar 27 00:12 | |
| *x-amarsh04 has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!) | Mar 27 01:43 | |
| *x-amarsh04 (~amarsh04@qezxp5nudz5uq.irc) has joined #techbytes | Mar 27 01:49 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | <schestowitz[TR2]> "MOVED" https://mastodon.social/ [...] | Mar 27 04:00 |
|---|---|---|
| schestowitz[TR2] | <DaemonFC> I wonder. | Mar 27 04:00 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | <DaemonFC> Did he do something to get shadowbanned? | Mar 27 04:00 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | spreading blood libel from Iran can kind of get you there. Mastodon views that as an image problem, as did Diaspora. | Mar 27 04:00 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-mastodon.social | Mastodon | Mar 27 04:00 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Re: about SUEPO | Mar 27 04:33 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > Dear Roy, | Mar 27 04:33 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > | Mar 27 04:33 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > In one of last articles about the Epo (More EPO Lies and SEO SPAM, | Mar 27 04:33 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > Substance Protected Behind a Paywall of the EPO's Propaganda Arm, IAM | Mar 27 04:33 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > <https://news.techrights.org/n/2024/03/20/More_EPO_Lies_and_SEO_SPAM_Substance_Protected_Behind_a_Paywall.shtmlNO_MENU_>), I have read : "Thefull version <https://suepo.org/archive/ex24007cpe.pdf>is locked behind a SUEPO paywall, so it's merely a/choice/of paywalls." | Mar 27 04:33 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > But there isn"t such a thing as a SUEPO paywall. You know the site of | Mar 27 04:33 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > SUEPO, some articles are publicly available, others are internal and | Mar 27 04:33 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > such the access is protected by a password. | Mar 27 04:33 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > Is there something I didn't understand? | Mar 27 04:33 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes- ( status 404 @ https://techrights.org/n/2024/03/20/More_EPO_Lies_and_SEO_SPAM_Substance_Protected_Behind_a_Paywall.shtmlNO_MENU_ ) | Mar 27 04:33 | |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes- ( status 403 @ https://suepo.org/archive/ex24007cpe.pdf ) | Mar 27 04:33 | |
| *jacobk (~quassel@838aynky6btpe.irc) has joined #techbytes | Mar 27 04:40 | |
| DaemonFC | schestowitz[TR2]: I told someone this when they complained about USCIS fee hikes coming. | Mar 27 06:07 |
| DaemonFC | > The price increases only apply to applications filed after April 1st, not to people that already filed. | Mar 27 06:07 |
| DaemonFC | > Also, for the N-400 at least, the new fee schedule has a 19% increase, but if you're under 400% of the FPL you can pay half of the new fee. I don't know how that'll work. Probably just another form or a screener in the E-File system. | Mar 27 06:07 |
| DaemonFC | > Some people already qualify for a fee waiver and USCIS statistics show that they don't deny those cases at a higher rate. | Mar 27 06:07 |
| DaemonFC | > The system is funded by user fees. Everyone can thank all of these 2-3 million so-called "asylum" cases in the past two years for clogging the pipes and not paying anything. | Mar 27 06:07 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | "pipe" | Mar 27 06:10 |
| DaemonFC | :D | Mar 27 06:14 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | how can u check shadowbans? | Mar 27 06:14 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | in fediverse for example? | Mar 27 06:14 |
| DaemonFC | I don't know. | Mar 27 06:14 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | https://www.reddit.com/r/Mastodon/comments/11sp5zy/is_it_possible_to_get_shadow_banned_on_mastodon/ | Mar 27 06:17 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes- ( status 403 @ https://www.reddit.com/r/Mastodon/comments/11sp5zy/is_it_possible_to_get_shadow_banned_on_mastodon/ ) | Mar 27 06:17 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Following and followers at 0 | Mar 27 06:17 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | privacy status locked | Mar 27 06:18 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | looks like the account stopped federating | Mar 27 06:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | 5 days ago | Mar 27 06:23 |
| DaemonFC | schestowitz[TR2]: That administrator has a habit of making it so you can't follow anyone without permission and only followers can see your posts. | Mar 27 06:26 |
| DaemonFC | If he completely banned an account there would be no option to redirect. | Mar 27 06:26 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | ok, i cannot make sense of it | Mar 27 06:30 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | if you can, if there was indeed a sanction, it would mean not only twitter keeps banning this person | Mar 27 06:30 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | and it would serve to show we were all along very much justified | Mar 27 06:31 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | some people cannot coexist with society | Mar 27 06:31 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | <li> | Mar 27 06:47 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | <h5><a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/new-zealand-says-parliamentarian-entities-hit-in-2021-by-malicious-cyber-activity-linked-to-state-sponsored-chinese-actor">New Zealand accuses China of hacking parliament, condemns activity</a></h5> | Mar 27 06:47 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | <blockquote> | Mar 27 06:47 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | <p>The New Zealand government said it had raised concerns on Tuesday with the Chinese government about its involvement in a state-sponsored cyber hack on New Zealand's parliament in 2021, which was uncovered by the country’s intelligence services. </p> | Mar 27 06:47 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | <p> The revelations that information was accessed through malicious cyber activity targeting New Zealand’s parliamentarian entities comes as Britain and the U.S. accuse China of a widesweeping cyber espionage campaign. Both New Zealand and Australia have condemned the broader activity. </p> | Mar 27 06:47 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | </blockquote> | Mar 27 06:47 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | </li> | Mar 27 06:47 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-www.straitstimes.com | New Zealand accuses China of hacking parliament, condemns activity | The Straits Times | Mar 27 06:47 | |
| DaemonFC | schestowitz[TR2]: My guess is the immigration attorneys don't like this ELIS system at all. It's reducing interactions with USCIS down to something that works like TurboTax. | Mar 27 07:16 |
| DaemonFC | If 80% can just go to a wizard and pay the filing fee, then that's a big problem for them. | Mar 27 07:17 |
| DaemonFC | Then the clients that come pay them are guaranteed to be the 20% that are the worst/hardest cases to get through the system. | Mar 27 07:17 |
| DaemonFC | The IRS used to be a lot scarier even with a relatively simple tax filing. | Mar 27 07:18 |
| DaemonFC | Most people just did not know the procedure. | Mar 27 07:18 |
| DaemonFC | Tax consultants used to be a lot bigger. Then people switched to all these cheap tax filing wizards that ask you what forms you have and figure out which deductions and credits you can take and sent it in instantly. | Mar 27 07:19 |
| DaemonFC | Paper filing Immigration petitions is really really awful. I did it once and it was just for a work permit and they approved it but it was a mountain of papers and I had to know a lot of things that I used the I-485 and such as a cheat sheet for. | Mar 27 07:20 |
| DaemonFC | Once you basically know how to file things with them, it gets a lot easier. Where things get difficult is in cases where it's really weak or they can do something horrible if you mess the smallest thing up or the client is no good. | Mar 27 07:21 |
| DaemonFC | The worst that happens if you screw up a Naturalization petititon is almost always they deny it, you lose your filing fee, and the bad things stop happening there. | Mar 27 07:21 |
| DaemonFC | But they only deny 3.7% of cases. | Mar 27 07:22 |
| DaemonFC | And out of that 3.7%, like maybe 1 in 1000 is at serious risk of losing their green card. | Mar 27 07:22 |
| DaemonFC | There's basically a few ways botched N-400s turn into removal proceedings. They find that they screwed up in issuing a green card (not likely....they said we provided a lot of bona fides and they sent it to us bypassing the interview). They find that the immigrant has abandoned their residence in the US by taking long trips out of the country (can't happen, he hasn't been out of the country since he arrived), and criminal history after the green card was | Mar 27 07:24 |
| DaemonFC | approved that comes to their attention while they're looking again (nope). | Mar 27 07:24 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | ack | Mar 27 07:27 |
| DaemonFC | schestowitz[TR2]: I looked up the local office handling our case. It says 80% of these are completed within 8 months. | Mar 27 07:29 |
| DaemonFC | That's not a bad processing time for them. I think they prioritize N-400s over other forms. | Mar 27 07:30 |
| DaemonFC | Because the Adjustment of Status and Removal of Conditions forms are like 24 and 18 months. | Mar 27 07:30 |
| DaemonFC | schestowitz[TR2]: The worst people seem to get into immigration and social security law. | Mar 27 07:32 |
| DaemonFC | schestowitz[TR2]: I asked one of them how much it would cost to get my FOID card back and one quoted me at $1,000. | Mar 27 07:33 |
| DaemonFC | I filled out the form in Okular and wrote a letter in LibreOffice and printed it out at FedEx for about $1 and then put it in in envelope and sent it in the mail to the State Police. | Mar 27 07:33 |
| DaemonFC | 8 months later, my FOID card came in the mail. | Mar 27 07:34 |
| DaemonFC | schestowitz[TR2]: According to the "When can I ask about my case" tool, 130% of the expected processing time for all cases would be January 18th, 2025. | Mar 27 08:06 |
| DaemonFC | I don't think I'm as likely to screw this up as Catholic Charities would be. | Mar 27 08:07 |
| DaemonFC | The only good thing about having gone there is I knew absolutely nothing about Immigration Law at the time and if we had filed 15 days later, the government would have basically ended our marriage for us (Trump's new regulation, which has since been revoked.) | Mar 27 08:08 |
| DaemonFC | The new regulations from Trump would have made it impossible to even file our case. | Mar 27 08:08 |
| DaemonFC | And if we managed, they would have almost certainly said no. | Mar 27 08:08 |
| DaemonFC | schestowitz[TR2]: I figure if Trump gets back into office, it'll take him maybe 6-9 months to sabotage their policies again. | Mar 27 08:11 |
| DaemonFC | But he will manage to do it. | Mar 27 08:11 |
| DaemonFC | It won't take him years to do it this time because the regulations are already written and he can just start the process of implementing them as soon as there is a confirmed DHS Secretary. | Mar 27 08:11 |
| DaemonFC | So if he gets voted back in, the only thing that may stop him is if Democrats are still in charge of the Senate and can block his appointment. | Mar 27 08:12 |
| DaemonFC | An Acting Secretary cannot create new rules. | Mar 27 08:12 |
| DaemonFC | So keeping Trump out of office is the first throw of the dice as far as saving Immigrants from new regulations. | Mar 27 08:13 |
| DaemonFC | If he is elected, the saving throw would be "Do Democrats keep 51 Senate seats?" That would be a tough one. The 2-3 "Moderate" Republicans can't be counted on to block anything. Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski voted to confirm Amy Coney Barrett and then acted shocked when Roe was not "settled law" anymore. | Mar 27 08:15 |
| DaemonFC | They knew what she would do. | Mar 27 08:15 |
| DaemonFC | https://egov.uscis.gov/processing-times/reducing-processing-backlogs | Mar 27 08:16 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-egov.uscis.gov | Reducing Processing Backlogs | Mar 27 08:16 | |
| DaemonFC | Their goal for an N-400 is 6 months to a decision. Chicago is managing about 8 months on average. | Mar 27 08:16 |
| DaemonFC | schestowitz[TR2]: I got myself a nice ankle brace. Having a much easier time walking now. | Mar 27 08:18 |
| DaemonFC | It's what they would have done in the ER, only.... "Not $14." | Mar 27 08:18 |
| DaemonFC | schestowitz[TR2]: One thing I've noticed is that every time I try to do something involving Mandy's immigration cases, the weather turns nasty. | Mar 27 08:20 |
| DaemonFC | When I mailed them the packet to renew his EAD, we had the worst thunderstorm I think I've ever seen and hail and some tornadoes in the area. | Mar 27 08:21 |
| DaemonFC | Then when they called us in for the hearing, we had the worst snowstorm in the area in over a decade that day and they were talking about maybe shutting the commuter trains down. | Mar 27 08:21 |
| DaemonFC | USCIS said anyone who couldn't make it would have their appointments rescheduled. | Mar 27 08:21 |
| DaemonFC | I said, "Like Hell." and we got on that train and we walked for miles through downtown in a snowstorm, during COVID, with the entire city looking abandoned and boarded up. | Mar 27 08:22 |
| DaemonFC | If they were there we were going to be there. | Mar 27 08:23 |
| DaemonFC | When I got back into town the roads were so iced up that my car was sliding around everywhere and my check battery light was coming on and off. I ended up driving us over to a bar that ignored the county's order to remain closed (COVID) and got us a gigantic pizza and then we went to see a movie, I don't even recall much of the movie, it was just nice to be there. | Mar 27 08:24 |
| DaemonFC | Halfway into the movie (nothing good was on because COVID, had the theater to ourselves....some utterly forgettable movie about space marines on some alien planet, direct to video quality too), my phone buzzed and they said that they were shipping Mandy's first green card (the conditional one). | Mar 27 08:25 |
| DaemonFC | schestowitz[TR2]: About the shadowbanning.... | Mar 27 08:26 |
| DaemonFC | It wouldn't be surprising at all if it was because of the anti-Semitic crap that he posts constantly. | Mar 27 08:26 |
| DaemonFC | Which hinges on Nazism and Holocaust denial sometimes. | Mar 27 08:27 |
| DaemonFC | The Mastodon Lobster, that is. | Mar 27 08:27 |
| DaemonFC | It doesn't ever cease to amaze me that the Holocaust deniers and such are always leftists. | Mar 27 08:27 |
| DaemonFC | Like really leftist lunatic "professors" and such. | Mar 27 08:28 |
| DaemonFC | Professors of what? | Mar 27 08:28 |
| DaemonFC | Nothing worth paying to learn. | Mar 27 08:28 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | my guess was the same | Mar 27 08:28 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | diaspora had similar issues | Mar 27 08:28 |
| DaemonFC | I'm glad that this particular Nazi is not in the United States. | Mar 27 08:29 |
| DaemonFC | Canada should take some off our hands. We're overloaded and Canada has been ruined for years anyway. | Mar 27 08:29 |
| DaemonFC | schestowitz[TR2]: It's trendy to say the shit. | Mar 27 08:30 |
| DaemonFC | I doubt most men who deny the Holocaust and "support the Palestinians" actually give a shit. | Mar 27 08:30 |
| DaemonFC | It's like Climate Change. | Mar 27 08:31 |
| DaemonFC | You get all about the Climate Change and then you get all kinds of pussy from crazy college girls or something. | Mar 27 08:31 |
| DaemonFC | I'll bet it works like that with this Palestinian crap too. | Mar 27 08:31 |
| DaemonFC | The only ones who really believe this shit are women. | Mar 27 08:32 |
| DaemonFC | Then some guys go along with it to get laid. | Mar 27 08:32 |
| DaemonFC | Men don't care about "the Palestinians" or the "Climate Change". They don't. | Mar 27 08:32 |
| DaemonFC | If they say they do, they're a pick-up artist. | Mar 27 08:32 |
| DaemonFC | I don't care about either issue, at all. Except to say that the False State of Palestine is a semi-recognized terror State that should have been dealt with a long time ago. | Mar 27 08:33 |
| DaemonFC | And they finally pushed too far. | Mar 27 08:33 |
| DaemonFC | And the only countries that recognize it are the worst countries on Earth....and Europe, so who the fuck cares? Not even ALL of Europe. | Mar 27 08:34 |
| DaemonFC | So parts of Europe and Russia and China, and some third world shit pits that are even worse than Russia and China recognize "Palestine". | Mar 27 08:34 |
| DaemonFC | schestowitz[TR2]: After we get the naturalization document I plan to make an in-person passport appointment for him. I am NOT sending THAT through the mail to anyone ever. | Mar 27 08:35 |
| DaemonFC | After all of the blood, sweat, and tears, and the agony of waiting for it, I am going to guard that document with my life. | Mar 27 08:36 |
| *Disconnected (Network is unreachable). | Mar 27 08:39 | |
| *Now talking on #techbytes | Mar 27 08:39 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | makes sense, i guess | Mar 27 08:43 |
| DaemonFC | If I lose a birth certificate I can pay $10 and postage and get another one. | Mar 27 08:45 |
| DaemonFC | When you're not even from this country and a replacement naturalization certificate costs several hundred dollars.....that's something else. | Mar 27 08:45 |
| DaemonFC | I came across John Lennon's green card issued by INS. | Mar 27 08:46 |
| DaemonFC | https://faroutmagazine.co.uk/how-john-lennon-got-his-green-card-and-became-a-us-citizen/ | Mar 27 08:46 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-faroutmagazine.co.uk | How John Lennon got his Green Card and became a US citizen - Far Out Magazine | Mar 27 08:46 | |
| *jacobk has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s) | Mar 27 09:23 | |
| *Moocher5254 has quit (Quit: https://quassel-irc.org - Chat comfortably. Anywhere.) | Mar 27 09:35 | |
| *lightbringer has quit (*.net *.split) | Mar 27 11:40 | |
| *rianne has quit (*.net *.split) | Mar 27 11:40 | |
| *roy has quit (*.net *.split) | Mar 27 11:40 | |
| *311AGXXXP has quit (*.net *.split) | Mar 27 11:40 | |
| *lightbringer (~mincer@freenode/user/lightbringer) has joined #techbytes | Mar 27 11:41 | |
| *rianne (~rianne@freenode-54p.goo.k31cok.IP) has joined #techbytes | Mar 27 11:41 | |
| *311AGXXXP (~quassel@freenode-vjedmj.ldvb.0amm.hij1op.IP) has joined #techbytes | Mar 27 11:41 | |
| *roy (~quassel@freenode-vjedmj.ldvb.0amm.hij1op.IP) has joined #techbytes | Mar 27 11:43 | |
| *roy has quit (*.net *.split) | Mar 27 12:21 | |
| *roy (~quassel@freenode-vjedmj.ldvb.0amm.hij1op.IP) has joined #techbytes | Mar 27 12:22 | |
| *Moocher5254 (~quassel@6i8ckjmvfhgyw.irc) has joined #techbytes | Mar 27 14:29 | |
| *psydroid2 (~psydroid@u8ftxtfux23wk.irc) has joined #techbytes | Mar 27 14:34 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | <li><h5><a href="https://www.r-bloggers.com/2024/03/r-dtplyr-how-to-efficiently-process-huge-datasets-with-a-data-table-backend/">R dtplyr: How to Efficiently Process Huge Datasets with a data.table Backend</a></h5><blockquote> | Mar 27 14:49 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | In a world where compute time is billed by the second, make every one of them count. There are zero valid reasons to utilize a quarter of your CPU and memory, but achieving complete resource utilization isn’t always a straightforward task. </blockquote></li> | Mar 27 14:49 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-R dtplyr: How to Efficiently Process Huge Datasets with a data.table Backend | R-bloggers | Mar 27 14:49 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2024/03/discrepancies-in-description-should-be.html?showComment=1711480448677#c4693381108589128817 | Mar 27 16:01 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-ipkitten.blogspot.com | Discrepancies in the description should be amended in line with the claims, but do not affect interpretation of the claims (T 0447/22) - The IPKat | Mar 27 16:01 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | 'Doubting Thomas | Mar 27 16:01 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Thanks for drawing my attention ...</a></h5><blockquote>Doubting Thomas<br /><br />Thanks for drawing my attention to my misuse of English language. I did never meant you as a person, but as representative of applicants/proprietors (or opponents), what you certainly are. <br /><br />It is my true opinion that Art 69 main use should be to assess whether a claim infringes Art 123(3). Any other application of Art 69 would end up in le | Mar 27 16:01 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | ngthy discussions between ED and applicant/proprietor, especially if it should be applied as well to documents of the prior art. <br /><br />If a granted claim is unclear, lack of clarity will not be a ground for amendment, and there is then no choice but to look at the description. In such a case, the intended meaning becomes irrelevant. What matters is the soundest possible technical meaning the skilled person could give to a fea | Mar 27 16:01 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | ture. <br /><br />If the wording of the claim does not give rise to any ambiguity, there should be no need to resort to the description, especially in order to give features in the claim a different meaning, or intended meaning, be it broader or more limiting. A feature in a claim is to be considered at face value. <br /><br />Whether a national court decides later, that there is infringement by equivalents, there is nothing to say | Mar 27 16:01 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | , but it it is not the role of a granting authority to look at every possible intended meaning of a claimed feature. <br /><br />For example, if a claim comprises the feature “ventilator”, the skilled person understands that the feature relates to a device which moves air in a given direction. If the applicant associates in the description a heating device so that the ventilator only blows hot air, then it will be ignored when | Mar 27 16:01 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | reading the claim. A piece of prior art disclosing a ventilator will be novelty destroying. <br /><br />In T 447/22, the board rightly reacted to the pretence of the proprietor that, due to certain passages in the description, the guiding device could as well have a steering function. There is no acontextual reading of the description by the board to be seen in T 447/22. <br /><br />The board rightly disagreed with the proprietor, | Mar 27 16:01 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | since steering and guiding are two different functions and it is technically not possible to consider that the protruding parts have a steering function, even if the proprietor meant that this could be the case. By looking at the description in T 447/2, the board indirectly applied Art 69 and told the proprietor that its intended meaning was technically incorrect. <br /><br />If there is one good example of the difference between | Mar 27 16:01 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | an intended meaning and a correctly assessed meaning, in other words, a technically sound meaning, it is the device in claim 1 as granted in T 447/22. You could not have chosen a worse example than that in T 447/22 for illustrating what you see as a correct vs. incorrect application of Art 69. <br />It is abundantly clear that yours and mine viewpoints are not converging. But claiming that only you have made use of a large amoun | Mar 27 16:01 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | t of rational analysis, or application of logic and reason, it extremely rude towards myself. <br /><br />Like for Art 84, support, I said everything I had to say, and vice-versa, so we better leave it at this. <br /><br />As far as Art 123(3) and Art 69 are concerned, I invite you to have a look at the recent decision T 2194/21 and the decisions discussed therein. <br />' | Mar 27 16:01 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2024/03/discrepancies-in-description-should-be.html?showComment=1711456064613#c3573193784369150013 | Mar 27 17:06 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-ipkitten.blogspot.com | Discrepancies in the description should be amended in line with the claims, but do not affect interpretation of the claims (T 0447/22) - The IPKat | Mar 27 17:06 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | "I never spoke about your personal motivations for taking certain positions.</i>”<br /><br />If that is the case, then I suggest that you avoid using the word “you” to refer to a third person (“<i>That as a proprietor, <b>you</b> want to push the limits of your interpretation in order to catch a potential infringer is understandable</i>”).<br /><br />Perhaps also stop making lazy assumptions about the motivations of paten | Mar 27 17:06 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | t monopoly proprietors. It is simply not true that all proprietors want the “<i>most extensive interpretation of the claims</i>”. Indeed, the mere existence of the IPQC demonstrates that not all patent monopoly applicants want the EPO to grant them the broadest possible claims, irrespective of validity concerns. Not everyone acts solely in accordance with their own personal interests and without a thought to the interests of so | Mar 27 17:06 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | ciety.<br /><br />Regarding the “acontextual” interpretation in T 447/22, I mentioned that to illustrate the broader point made in the preceding sentence, namely the fact that the EPO does not (routinely) interpret the claims in accordance with all of the provisions of Art 69 EPC and its Protocol.<br /><br />In a post on another blog, you have expressed the view that there are diverging lines of case law regarding the applicati | Mar 27 17:06 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | on of Art 69, and that:<br />“<i>Strictly speaking Art 69 is only to be used when determining the scope of protection under Art 123(3) in opposition. No other part of the EPC relies directly or indirectly to Art 69 during procedures before the EPO.</i>”<br /><br />You now express the view that “<i>the approach of the board </i>[in T 447/22]<i>to claim interpretation is absolutely correct and technically sound, and is moreover | Mar 27 17:06 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | clearly in line with Art 69 and its Protocol of interpretation</i>”.<br /><br />Therefore, if I follow your reasoning, you believe that:<br />- except for determining compliance with Art 123(3) EPC, Art 69 EPC should <b>not</b> be applied during procedures before the EPO; but<br />- an example of a claim interpretation which follows this approach (and, in your view, is “absolutely correct”) is nevertheless fully in line with | Mar 27 17:06 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Art 69 EPC <i>and</i> its Protocol.<br /><br />All that I can say to this is that I now understand why no amount of rational analysis, or application of logic and reason, has enabled me to understand how you arrived at your current viewpoint." | Mar 27 17:06 |
| *psydroid2 has quit (connection closed) | Mar 27 17:45 | |
| *psydroid2 (~psydroid@u8ftxtfux23wk.irc) has joined #techbytes | Mar 27 17:51 | |
| *parsifal (~parsifal@uuar9r28yasyu.irc) has joined #techbytes | Mar 27 18:34 | |
| *psydroid2 has quit (Quit: KVIrc 5.0.0 Aria http://www.kvirc.net/) | Mar 27 22:06 | |
| *jacobk (~quassel@32hz32it3ih2k.irc) has joined #techbytes | Mar 27 22:12 | |
| *jacobk has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s) | Mar 27 23:36 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.6 | ䷉ find the plain text version at this address (HTTP) or in Gemini (how to use Gemini) with a full GemText version.