Re: [Patents] Re: [Upd-discuss] SCOTUS Overrules Rigid US AppealsCourt Approach to Patentability of Combinations of Existing Elements

[PILCH Hartmut <phm@a2e.de>]

> So, what in these fundementals (or even in Gödel's theorem if you like)
> are not "pure abstraction" ? Where is that "false science" ? Do you have
> counterproofs ? Real science of your own or by relatives you would like
> to present to court and/or pair review to assert your claims, or is it
> just some more air-ballooned assertion trying to reach reason-impaired
> people into believing your corporate master propaganda ?

We know well that it's the latter, see some previous dialogues collected at

   http://eupat.ffii.org/players/aharonian/

But in one point Greg may be right: such US supreme court decisions tend to be
much less far-reaching in reality than they are hyped in the media initially.

A whole series of decisions going back and forth between the courts is needed,
before any relatively stable doctrine can emerge.

But there's reason to assume that the spark has jumped over to the courts and
can spread further.

It's probably a better time now than ever for following the discussion and
bringing it to a legislative level in the US.

-- 
Hartmut Pilch                           http://a2e.de/phm