-- Leo's gemini proxy
-- Connecting to gemini.techrights.org:1965...
-- Connected
-- Sending request
-- Meta line: 20 text/gemini;lang=en-GB
00:20 *SomeH4x0r has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s)
00:21 *SomeH4x0r (~someh4xx@yaf5revuadim4.irc) has joined #techbytes
01:12 *psydroid4 has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s)
01:22 *DaemonFC has quit (Quit: Leaving)
01:49 *besoms (~randolf@joseon-jib.85t.f5do4k.IP) has joined #techbytes
01:50 *besoms (~randolf@joseon-jib.85t.f5do4k.IP) has left #techbytes
02:28 *DaemonFC (~daemonfc@yfek6fr3tfmr2.irc) has joined #techbytes
03:00 *GNUmoon2 has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s)
03:00 *hyperreal has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s)
03:01 *hyperrea- (~hyperreal@uwig9nz6889zi.irc) has joined #techbytes
03:04 *SomeH4x0r has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s)
03:07 *SomeH4x0r (~someh4xx@u24cqz6d6jkie.irc) has joined #techbytes
03:14 *GNUmoon2 (~GNUmoon@r7zq4q2ys63yk.irc) has joined #techbytes
03:22 *anontor (~anontor@fpp9gt5hhpz2q.irc) has joined #techbytes
03:47 *besoms (~randolf@joseon-jib.85t.f5do4k.IP) has joined #techbytes
03:51 *besoms (~randolf@joseon-jib.85t.f5do4k.IP) has left #techbytes
04:09 schestowitz__[TR]; http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2021/12/the-ipkat-epo-enlarged-board-of-appeal.html?showComment=1640868943209#c7591257325597428925
04:09 -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-ipkitten.blogspot.com | The IPKat EPO Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) Year in Review 2021 - The IPKat
04:09 schestowitz__[TR]; "
04:09 schestowitz__[TR]; It is farcical to see the president of the BA and the president of the EPO signing a MoU.
04:09 schestowitz__[TR]; One should not forget that the former only has the powers delegated to him by the latter.
04:09 schestowitz__[TR]; The chair of the BA has to approved by the president even if he appointed by the AC.
04:09 schestowitz__[TR]; The day the BA can forward their budget request directly the AC we will be able to see a beginning of perception of independence. But it still remains that the conditions of reappointment have never been published.
04:09 schestowitz__[TR]; Only a proper reform of the statute of the BA without any possibility of the president to interfere with the working of the BA will the BA be fully independent. In 2004 an opportunity was sadly missed.
04:09 schestowitz__[TR]; As far as the return to Munich is concerned, the person responsible will never have to support the costs implied. The users and the staff are footing the bill.
04:09 schestowitz__[TR]; But what can you do when immunity means impunity.
04:09 schestowitz__[TR]; And the tail is wagging the dog.
04:09 schestowitz__[TR]; It is a disgrace that the AC does not any longer controls the office and its president.
04:09 schestowitz__[TR]; But the cooperation budget is in good hands.
04:09 schestowitz__[TR]; "
04:13 *greenhorns (~gromit@joseon-jib.85t.f5do4k.IP) has joined #techbytes
04:18 *greenhorns (~gromit@joseon-jib.85t.f5do4k.IP) has left #techbytes
04:47 *hyperrea- is now known as hyperreal
06:51 *liberty_box has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s)
06:56 *u-amarsh04 (~amarsh04@6pxtd49npuduw.irc) has joined #techbytes
08:00 *DaemonFC has quit (Quit: Leaving)
09:26 *tech_exorcist (~tech_exorcist@28sj384zrmwke.irc) has joined #techbytes
09:28 *liberty_box (~liberty@suig26pxj59pi.irc) has joined #techbytes
09:38 *besoms (~randolf@joseon-jib.85t.f5do4k.IP) has joined #techbytes
09:38 *besoms (~randolf@joseon-jib.85t.f5do4k.IP) has left #techbytes
11:11 *besoms (~randolf@joseon-jib.85t.f5do4k.IP) has joined #techbytes
11:11 *besoms (~randolf@joseon-jib.85t.f5do4k.IP) has left #techbytes
11:14 *psydroid4 (~psydroid@cqggrmwgu7gji.irc) has joined #techbytes
13:33 *tech_exorcist has quit (connection closed)
13:39 *tech_exorcist (~tech_exorcist@9jw4gist7eai4.irc) has joined #techbytes
14:04 *tech_exorcist has quit (Quit: see you later)
17:10 *tech_exorcist (~tech_exorcist@agkps5rm7zn9y.irc) has joined #techbytes
17:13 schestowitz__[TR]; \http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2021/12/breaking-board-of-appeal-finds-no-legal.html?showComment=1641080665517#c7814833813590477810
17:13 -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-ipkitten.blogspot.com | Board of Appeal finds no legal basis for the requirement to amend the description in line with the claims (T 1989/18) - The IPKat
17:13 schestowitz__[TR]; "
17:13 schestowitz__[TR]; I suppose this comments thread has gone to sleep now but, if not, I offer the following comment and hope for reaction.
17:13 schestowitz__[TR]; I find para 5. of the "reasons"in the written Decision somewhat superficial because it fails to address the question what does the word "support" mean (in the context of Art 84 EPC). Does it mean i) "backs up" or "corroborates", or does it mean ii) "enables" the claimed subject matter.
17:13 schestowitz__[TR]; Suppose I file at the EPO, with a claim to the feature combination A+B+C+D, the EPO searches and finds in prior publication P1 exactly that feature combination. In reply I file a 2-part independent claim to "A+B+C+D characterized by X". I leave the description unamended, whereby it continues to declare that the invention is A+B+C+D. That was true when the patent application was filed but it is manifestly false, as soon as D1 is brought to
17:13 schestowitz__[TR]; light. The unamended WO description text enables the granted claim but does it corroborate the granted claim? I think not. Consider witness testimony at trial. Witness A gives evidence of fact and, later, Witness B gives evidence which flatly contradicts that given earlier by A. Does Witness B "support" Witness A? Isn't that contention a bit of a stretch?
17:13 schestowitz__[TR]; Reverting to Para 5 of the Reasons, after the first two sentences, the text simply recites the constraints on using the description to construe the claim. But just because you can't use the description to get to an artificial meaning for the claim does not mean that it is obligatory and in all cases and circumstances to construe the claim as if you have not already read the description (or that the description doesn't even exist). I mean, the
17:13 schestowitz__[TR]; B publication is a single document with several parts. One supposes that the legislator envisaged that the person construing the claim would do it only after reading all the parts of the document, to gain a cumulative undertsanding of its teaching. Shouldn't those different parts then be rendered consistent with each other, to spare the court construing the claim unnecessary stress and confusion? If a description in an EPO B publication flatly
17:13 schestowitz__[TR]; contradicts the granted claim in regard to what the subject invention is, to what extent does that description "support" that claim? In other words, will an enabling description always satisfy the Art 84 requirement that it "support" the claim, regardless how egregiously the description contradicts the claim in its statements of what the invention is?
17:13 schestowitz__[TR]; The EPO has an ongoing practical problem with the strictness of its Gold Standard. Applicants with a deserving invention nevertheless often find themselves in the Bermuda Triangle, needing to amend to comply with Art 84 but unable to do so without offending one or both of Art 123(2) or 84. I wonder whether the motivation for this Decision is to reduce the number of deserving inventions that perish in the Bermuda Triangle. The problem with that
17:13 schestowitz__[TR]; is that easing the requirement to conform the description strictly to the allowable claims will do nothing to help in that regard.
17:13 schestowitz__[TR]; Alternatively, the EPO Boards of Appeal are looking for ways to remove aspects of practice peculiar to the EPO (of which conforming the description is one) which increase prosecution costs at the EPO and which therefore irritate bulk corporate EPO filers and so occupy their powerful lobby.
17:13 schestowitz__[TR]; "
17:50 *Disconnected (Connection timed out).
19:02 schestowitz; > Thanks. I've made minor tweaks to the layout, mostly for consistency
19:02 schestowitz; > with the rest of the capsule. I notice that it is not possible to
19:02 schestowitz; > extract the title of the video from the metadata, as it is not present:
19:02 schestowitz; >
19:02 schestowitz; > $ exiftool edu-tech.webm
19:02 schestowitz; > ExifTool Version Number : 12.16
19:02 schestowitz; > File Name : edu-tech.webm
19:02 schestowitz; > Directory : .
19:02 schestowitz; > File Size : 106 MiB
19:02 schestowitz; > File Modification Date/Time : 2022:01:02 00:35:49+02:00
19:02 schestowitz; > File Access Date/Time : 2022:01:02 07:02:49+02:00
19:02 schestowitz; > File Inode Change Date/Time : 2022:01:02 07:02:49+02:00
19:02 schestowitz; > File Permissions : rw-rw-r--
19:02 schestowitz; > File Type : WEBM
19:02 schestowitz; > File Type Extension : webm
19:02 schestowitz; > MIME Type : video/webm
19:02 schestowitz; > EBML Version : 1
19:02 schestowitz; > EBML Read Version : 1
19:02 schestowitz; > Doc Type : webm
19:02 schestowitz; > Doc Type Version : 4
19:02 schestowitz; > Doc Type Read Version : 2
19:03 schestowitz; > Timecode Scale : 1 ms
19:03 schestowitz; > Muxing App : Lavf58.20.100
19:03 schestowitz; > Writing App : Lavf58.20.100
19:03 schestowitz; > Duration : 0:26:20
19:03 schestowitz; > Video Frame Rate : 30
19:03 schestowitz; > Image Width : 1920
19:03 schestowitz; > Image Height : 1080
19:03 schestowitz; > Track Number : 2
19:03 schestowitz; > Track Language : und
19:03 schestowitz; > Codec ID : A_OPUS
19:03 schestowitz; > Track Type : Audio
19:03 schestowitz; > Audio Channels : 2
19:03 schestowitz; > Audio Sample Rate : 48000
19:03 schestowitz; > Audio Bits Per Sample : 32
19:03 schestowitz; > Tag Name : DURATION
19:03 schestowitz; > Tag String : 00:26:19.652000000
19:03 schestowitz; > Image Size : 1920x1080
19:03 schestowitz; > Megapixels : 2.1
19:03 schestowitz; >
19:03 schestowitz; > So the videos will have to remain displayed by file name only.
19:03 schestowitz; Yes, I never specify anything but a filename for them.
19:03 schestowitz; > Too bad. It would be rather easy to extract any metadata that was there
19:03 schestowitz; > and use it in the Gemini description.
19:03 schestowitz; It would need entering, which is another step and when I start encoding I don't yet know the post title
19:03 schestowitz; BTW, server/network down at the moment, trying to get more inho
19:03 schestowitz; >> BTW, server/network down at the moment, trying to get more inho
19:03 schestowitz; >>
19:03 schestowitz; > Yes, it seems even hv is unavailable atm.
19:03 schestowitz; [17:44] <schestowitz> ping
19:03 schestowitz; [17:45] <schestowitz> you probably know this already, but just in case: network of server offline for about 7 mins
19:03 schestowitz; [18:34] <schestowitz> I did traceroute, looks like it's just the network, which means not outage (power)... checked the US forecast and it looks like no major storm of cold wave
20:05 schestowitz; https://www.patentdocs.org/2022/01/webinar-on-top-patent-law-stories-of-2021.html
20:05 schestowitz; "McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP will be offering a live webinar on the "Top Patent Law Stories of 2021" on January 19, 2021 from 10:00 am to 11:15 am (CT). Since 2007, the Patent Docs weblog has presented an annual, end-of-the-year review of the top stories in patent law. In this presentation, Patent Docs co-authors Donald Zuhn, Kevin Noonan, and Michael Borella will take a look back at the top patent stories of 2021, many
20:05 schestowitz; of which will likely impact patent applicants and practitioners in the coming year."
21:31 *Now talking on #techbytes
21:31 *Topic for #techbytes is: Welcome to the official channel of the TechBytes Audiocast
21:31 *Topic for #techbytes set by schestowitz!~roy@haii6za73zabc.irc at Tue Jun 1 20:21:34 2021
21:31 *schestowitz-TR (~acer-box@suig26pxj59pi.irc) has joined #techbytes
21:31 *schestowitz has quit (Connection closed)
21:31 *spazzz (~spazz@urifce6zxwtdi.irc) has joined #techbytes
21:31 *viera (~viera@njsz8uc49vydg.irc) has joined #techbytes
21:31 *rianne_ (~rianne@suig26pxj59pi.irc) has joined #techbytes
21:31 *rianne__ (~rianne@suig26pxj59pi.irc) has joined #techbytes
21:31 *u-amarsh04 (~amarsh04@6pxtd49npuduw.irc) has joined #techbytes
21:31 *rianne (~rianne@suig26pxj59pi.irc) has joined #techbytes
21:31 *ebin (~ebin@dne4qqwj27qau.irc) has joined #techbytes
21:32 *libertybox (~schestowitz_log@suig26pxj59pi.irc) has joined #techbytes
21:32 *liberty_box (~liberty@suig26pxj59pi.irc) has joined #techbytes
21:32 *psydroid2 (~psydroid@cqggrmwgu7gji.irc) has joined #techbytes
21:32 *schestowitz (~roy@suig26pxj59pi.irc) has joined #techbytes
21:32 *irc.techrights.org sets mode +q #techbytes schestowitz
21:32 *schestowitz (~schestowi@freenode/user/schestowitz) has joined #techbytes
21:33 *anontor (~anontor@pmm6a84n53eyc.irc) has joined #techbytes
21:35 *leah (~leah@wrh2nipuzrd3y.irc) has joined #techbytes
21:36 *GNUmoon2 (~GNUmoon@p6ij7q2n2uaeg.irc) has joined #techbytes
21:36 *MinceR (~mincer@bringer.of.light) has joined #techbytes
21:36 *irc.techrights.org sets mode +a #techbytes MinceR
21:37 *TechBytesBot (~b0t@ju4kayhrhsm6a.irc) has joined #techbytes
21:37 TechBytesBot; Hello World! I'm TechBytesBot running phIRCe v0.75
21:43 *DaemonFC (~daemonfc@txi9fstwkuxpq.irc) has joined #techbytes
21:44 *qa2 (~sid145515@frp6gv52kp9fi.irc) has joined #techbytes
22:35 *psydroid2 has quit (Quit: Leaving)
22:37 *psydroid2 (~psydroid@cqggrmwgu7gji.irc) has joined #techbytes
-- Response ended
-- Page fetched on Sat May 18 04:05:33 2024