Hacker News Reader

Comment by overbroad | Hacker News Reader

What are those acronyms developers like to use? rtfm, utsl, etc.? :)

There is a link to the court rules in the article. This is the definitive source, besides knowing clerks personally.

There is some cynicism in this thread about whether this rehearing will amount to anything but I think this shows the system is definitely aware of what the media is saying about software patents, and what you are saying in online forums. Does the USPTO read stackexchange? I think we all know the answer to that.

You have the right idea. Make your voice heard.

View on HN

The link to the court rules [1] is a good start, but is not actionable unless the reader is a lawyer. You sound like a lawyer, so that may be fine for you, but most of the HN audience is comprised of non-lawyers.

If you are indeed a lawyer, would you (or any other lawyer here) be willing to draft a template that software engineers can customize (the interest section), sign, and mail to the court?

Bilski v Kappos is a case that dealt with similar subject matter. The FSF[2], SFLC[3], Red Hat[4], and Google [5] filed amicus curiae briefs lamenting software patents. Surely there is something reusable here, especially from Red Hat pages 12-19.

[1] (see pages 56-57) http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/rules-of-practic...

[2] http://endsoftpatents.org/amicus-bilski-2009

[3] http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2009/bilski-amicus-...

[4] http://www.groklaw.net/images/BilskiRedHatSCbrief.pdf

[5] http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publishing/previe...

Have you even looked at the rules? Paper sizes, fonts, lengths, deadlines. Do you need to be a lawyer to understand rules like those?

You are only interested in what they say about amicus briefs.

Anyway, I'm not even sure you can file amicus briefs for this case as a developer worried about software patents. But there's no harm in reading those rules. They are boring but that's what everyone has to follow. If you want to send stuff to the court, then you'd be wise to read those rules first. Take the initiative. Ask questions.

Maybe some weathly developers will call their lawyers and ask them what can be done? What are the chances of that?

Apathy. It favors the patent trolls.

I did read the rules, but what good is form without substance?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com