Hindsight bias, the phenomenon that things seem more predictable and obvious after they have occurred, is one of the most widely-studied “decision traps” in psychology… Patent litigation plays right into such human limitations, which affect judges and jurors alike. Patents are often litigated many years after the invention was made, and very often those who are accused of patent infringement will argue that the invention was obvious at the time it was made and a patent was applied for… And we accept a surprising amount of other conjecture in this analysis. For example, judges and jurors are told about a contemporaneous hypothetical person that – despite having only ordinary skill in the relevant technology – would have had super-human knowledge of all then-existing technical information, was fluent in every language under the sun, and would have done insane things to access information sources.
The post Conjecture and Speculation in Patent Obviousness: Trading Logic for Hindsight appeared first on IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Patent Law.
Recent Posts
- New USPTO Group to Crack Down on Threats to U.S. Patent System
- IP, Globalization and the Future of Supply Chains: A Conversation with Sonja London | IPWatchdog Unleashed
- IPWatchdog’s New Publication Policy: No Paywall, But No Free Ride
- UPC vs. EPO Oppositions: Lessons from Recent UPC Case Law
- Other Barks & Bites for Friday, April 11: CAFC Denies Transfer of EDTX Patent Case; Texas Leads Entire U.S. in IP Exports; and Google Declines to Respond to Cellspin Soft Cert Petition