Comments on: December 21 roundup

By: For Those About to Mosh (Assume the Risk) « Siouxsie Law

For Those About to Mosh (Assume the Risk) « Siouxsie Law — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 06:45:29 +0000

[…] Source — Overlawyered.com […]

By: Bill Poser

Bill Poser — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 04:00:33 +0000

VMS,

The Eolas patents are software patents, which many people think should not exist, and whose status is questionable due to the ruling in Bilski. So, no, they aren’t trolls, and they may not be invalid due to prior art etc., but they fall into a problematic category.

By: VMS

VMS — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 22:36:20 +0000

?Company claiming patent on Ajax web technique is suing lots of defendants [W3C, ImVivo via @petewarden]

And rightly so. It seems that their patents were subject to 2 reexamination proceedings before the US Patent and Trademark Office and their patents were upheld each time. Also, they won a $565 million dollar judgment against Microsoft for patent infringement in 2004.

If the thieves were stealing tangible items from Eolas Technologies instead of their intellectual property concerning Asynchronous Javascript XML, I don’t think anyone would have a problem with the lawsuits.

By: Bill H

Bill H — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 05:42:13 +0000

I agree with Frank- it sounds to me that Mr Seligsohn was a bit of a screw-up. My question- what is a ‘runner’? Please forgive the ignorance- I’m a car electrician, not a lawyer.

By: Frank

Frank — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 21:34:32 +0000

Disbarment for conviction under anti-runner law? I tend to think the multiple counts of criminal fraud may be the actual reason.

By: mojo

mojo — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 20:40:05 +0000

Breast implants, sure. Donated organs, not so much.

I think the implants also qualify as “family recreation”…