> If you have read any sufficiently advanced patent, you'll easily see they're very hard to replicate without insider knowledge, bastardizing the principle behind protection due to publication.
I've certainly read my fair share of patents, and bluntly, I don't understand how you can make that claim. (har har)
Yes, patents are written with a POSITA (person having ordinary skill in the art) in mind, meaning you need familiarity with the area to understand them. A large part of the patent prosecution process is ensuring that the patent meets that standard. So I don't immediately buy that they're "very hard to replicate" for such an individual.
Heck, that would work against any individual patenting an invention, as if the patent cannot be understood by a POSITA, then it can't be easily enforced in a court of law. The entire Markman hearing process would fall apart if the judge couldn't form a coherent understanding of the claims.
Do you have examples where you believe this to be the case?
I've certainly read my fair share of patents, and bluntly, I don't understand how you can make that claim. (har har)
Yes, patents are written with a POSITA (person having ordinary skill in the art) in mind, meaning you need familiarity with the area to understand them. A large part of the patent prosecution process is ensuring that the patent meets that standard. So I don't immediately buy that they're "very hard to replicate" for such an individual.
Heck, that would work against any individual patenting an invention, as if the patent cannot be understood by a POSITA, then it can't be easily enforced in a court of law. The entire Markman hearing process would fall apart if the judge couldn't form a coherent understanding of the claims.
Do you have examples where you believe this to be the case?