hmm..thanks for that link to here (http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/03/29/the-prometheus-decision-no-worries-no-problem/id=23661/) . i honestly must have missed a memo somewhere along the way, and, well, it is really really good to be aware of this - so yeah thanks.
For me, the commentary to highlight there was this bit:
It is clear that the Court zeroed in on their core concern – of tipping the balance from the exclusivity of a patent grant on one hand and the flow of information needed for future innovation on the other. Whenever the Court mentions a “balance,” the patent bar should get nervous because invariably, “balancing tests” will soon find their way into future lower court decisions that bear little semblance to what (we think) the Court intended in the decision.
no subject
For me, the commentary to highlight there was this bit:
It is clear that the Court zeroed in on their core concern – of tipping the balance from the exclusivity of a patent grant on one hand and the flow of information needed for future innovation on the other. Whenever the Court mentions a “balance,” the patent bar should get nervous because invariably, “balancing tests” will soon find their way into future lower court decisions that bear little semblance to what (we think) the Court intended in the decision.