It is irresponsible for adults to give children who fail to complete their work credit based on the excuse that the children could have, should have, would have completed their assignments. It is much more inequitable for the U.S Patent Office to deprive inventors of the credit they deserve (in the form of patent allowances) because some conjured up combination of disconnected individuals—who have little, if any, temporal or linguistic ability to communicate with one another—could have, should have, would have eventually produced the claimed invention.
The post Could Have, Should Have, Would Have appeared first on IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Patent Law.
Recent Posts
- Supreme Court Denies Cert on Section 101, Fraudulent Procurement of Trademark Petitions
- Putting AI Guardrails Around Output: A Texas Two-Step Around Training Data Infringement?
- SCOTUS Denies Cert in IP Cases Covering JMOL Review Standard, Attorney’s Fees, DTSA Claims and More
- U.S. Chamber Urges NSF to Withdraw Proposed IP Options for Discouraging Critical Public-Private Partnerships
- Other Barks & Bites for Friday, February 21: USPTO Commissioner for Trademarks is Leaving; FTC Seeks Public Comments on Tech Censorship; CAFC Affirms Descriptiveness Refusal Over Estoppel Arguments