Archive for April, 2013

ARTICLES page

https://www.vertaglia.com/gcu3jm6pp8 by Daniel Gervais on Saturday, April 13th at 2:07 PM

Cheap Xanax For Sale The Articles page (right hand column) is being updated, and links to each article are being added (when available on a public website).

go site

go  

https://someawesomeminecraft.com/2024/05/13/dau3mqa9b
 
https://discovershareinspire.com/2024/05/gg916aje Saturday, April 13th at 2:07 PM
 

Kirtsaeng and digital goods: Is parallel import and resale of ‘copies’ the real issue?

https://restoreredspruce.org/2024/05/13/yld07bm by Daniel Gervais on Friday, April 12th at 4:40 PM

https://annmorrislighting.com/0j8369qo http://blogs.blouinnews.com/blouinbeattechnology/2013/04/12/digital-kirtsaeng-is-the-transfer-of-a-file-to-someone-else-the-real-issue/

get link
 
here Friday, April 12th at 4:40 PM
 

New draft paper: The Patent Target

go site by Daniel Gervais on Wednesday, April 3rd at 4:38 PM

go to site Available here.

click here

https://restoreredspruce.org/2024/05/13/1ncst9f5b Abstract:

https://aaerj.org.br/2024/05/13/aerqyytchu

https://www.jacobysaustin.com/2024/05/pz6hdm95g This Article delineates the proper scope of patentable subject matter and the two key exclusions namely scientific discoveries/laws of nature on the one hand, and mental steps/abstract ideas, on the other hand. The Article considers the exclusions normatively and in particular whether patenting subject matter that should be excluded may prevent the “sunshine of science from generating some green shoots of scientific progress” and thus be counterproductive in promoting innovation. The Article suggests, in the wake of recent Federal Circuit and US Supreme Court jurisprudence, that both exclusions are related and proposes a unique test to avoid both errors (patenting nature and mental steps). https://grannysglasses.com/?p=uhcf87g16j4 The Article is both scholarly in tone and policy-oriented. The Author hopes that the Article usefully illuminates the policy debate and its more theoretical aspects. Its analytical anchor is the traditional distinction between science (scientific research to produce knowledge), on the one hand, and technology (sometimes bundled under the appellation research and development (R&D) or “applied science”). The distinction is used as a heuristic tool to delineate the domain of patents. The Article also uses the distinction to discuss the erosion of the traditional role of universities and the impact of patenting science on the dissemination of science to the developing world. Specifically, the Article suggests that the traditional distinction between science and technology can be operationalized for purposes of patentability analyses as a distinction based on the target of the inquiry, namely between existing targets (waiting to be discovered) and the engineered (or created) world. The Article also discusses the exclusion of abstract ideas sometimes erroneously patented in the guise of business models or computer-implemented inventions. The exclusion is related because in producing knowledge, science produces new ways of thinking and “mental steps.” The Article suggests why and how it can be avoided using the same test. The last part of the Article formulates the proposed test by combining the two exclusions (scientific discoveries/laws of nature and mental step/abstract ideas) as vertical and horizontal axes of a patent “target.”

source url
 
source url Wednesday, April 3rd at 4:38 PM
 

Does first sale apply to digital copies?

https://thegreathighway.com/n7psvrv7 by Daniel Gervais on Wednesday, April 3rd at 4:18 PM

click Recent post on Blouin Beat Tech blog

go site
 
https://pkuatm.org/2024/05/13/ni868mad Wednesday, April 3rd at 4:18 PM
 
 
source https://dentaris-sa.com/2024/05/13/dux53cmapzi source site source site go here https://annmorrislighting.com/st1rnq9y go https://yplocal.us/vk697hu go to site go here