PROFESSOR PETITIONS PTO TO ABOLISH SILLY COMPUTER SCIENCE RULE

To sit for the patent bar, for someone whose academic background is in computer science, you need a bachelors degree in computer science from a school accredited either by the CSAB's CSAC or the ABET's CAC - two boards that accredit computer science programs. The problem is that most of the leading computer science departments, often part of engineering schools, are accredited differently. In 2006, Prof. Thomas Field of the Franklin Pierce Law School petitioned the PTO to modify this requirement, arguing that it unfairly restricted many worthy candidates from applying for the patent bar. In May 2006, PTO lawyer Toupin responded with a rejection of the petition, ignoring all of the legitimate merits of the argument, and instead pretty much arguing that Field didn't dot his "i"s and cross his "t"s. Now Toupin could have remembered that he is a public servant, instead of an anal weenie, and wrote back and said "While your petition is defective, we agree the Rule is unduly restrictive, and have changed it accordingly".

ANOTHER PROFESSOR GENERATES STUPID ARTICLE ON PATENT REFORM

The 11 August 2008 edition of Forbes, page 30, has an opinion piece by real estate law professor Michael Heller of Columbia Law School on patent reform. What's next, an article on patent reform by divorce settlement law professor? If nothing else, his opinion piece supports the argument that Mark Chandler of Cisco and his ilk in the CPF are whiners. Heller argues that too many crappy biotech/pharm patents are stifling research and driving up litigation costs. His solution? Change the formula for patent litigation damages (gee, I wonder where Heller gets some of his academic support)? Not once in the article is any mention of reforming the incompetent and corrupt PTO management, which gets rid of most of the problems Heller and Chandler whine about. That's the law professors' solution to every legal problem - anything (like more legislation) but what might actually solve the problem. Columbia Law School is near New York University, which means nothing, except it gives me an opportunity to insult once again the IBM scam otherwise knows as the NYU Patent Public Peer Review joke.

Morons proclaim September 24th the World Anti-Software Patent Day

Newswires report that on September 24th, lying engineering/law morons around the world will be organizing an anti-software patent day. Liars because they are really against all patents, morons because their arguments are equally applicable to hardware patents. But they can't argue against hardware patents because that would reveal their true goal - the elimination of patents for unconstitutionally, plague-like (according to the ABA) copyright system.