Patent scope limited by the summary

Normally, the scope of a patent is limited by its claims interpreted in light of the specification. The claims are a series of sentences that describe the invention. In most cases, they are written so that they broadly describe the invention thereby giving the inventor the broadest possible patent and the broadest possible protection.

Sometimes, however, judges ruling on patent cases will rely so heavily on the specification that they artificially limit the scope of the claims. A lawyer whose case is hurt by such an interpretation often presumes that the judge couldn't understand the claims (which can often be confusing) and instead relied on the specification - a much simpler portion of the patent.

This is a case where the judge relied on the summary of the invention to interpret the claims. The summary is a minor portion of a patent that is often informal and only included to make the patent easier to find in the various patent databases.

Whether or not the ruling was legitimate, it is a great reminder the specification should in no way limit the invention or call out necessary or preferred characteristics of an invention.

Ernest Gallo, 97, Dies

Ernest Gallo of E. & J. Gallo Winery has died, reports the NY Times. I only recently became aware of Mr. Gallo and his winery after reading about them in a Trademark case dealing with another's similar trade mark. After reading the case, however, I now know that his winery is one of the largest in the country and imports a massive amount of Italian wines.

E. & J. Gallo Winery is the source of 'Thunderbird' wine. I've heard of it, but never tried it:

It was named after the Ford sports car and was aimed directly at “the misery market,” according to “Blood and Wine,” Ellen Hawkes’s unauthorized biography of the family. By the end of 1957, Ms. Hawkes reported, Gallo was making 32 million gallons of Thunderbird.

Tiny RFID Tags

As reported by the BBC, Hitachi has unveiled the world's smallest RFID tag. As always, an announcement like this will spur some debate about privacy and the advancement of technology.

Buffet says spend it quick

The Arizona Republic reports that Warren Buffet has expressed a hope that his money will be spent "quickly" after his death.

In his annual letter to shareholders of his holding company, Berkshire Hathaway Inc., Buffett said his will states that the proceeds from all shares he owns at death must be used for "philanthropic purposes within 10 years after my estate is closed."

"I want the money to be spent relatively promptly by people I know to be capable, vigorous and motivated," said Buffett, 76. "These managerial attributes sometimes wane as institutions, particularly those that are exempt from market forces, age."

I have always thought that the pinnacle of human achievement was not simply the acquisition of political power and wealth, but rather the ability to changes things for the better. I can think of no greater role model than Warren Buffet in that respect.

More Sirius-XM News

More Sirius-XM merger news from the NY Times.

This time it's an article describing the CEO of Sirius Radio, Mel Karmazin. The article provides a nice description of Mr. Karmazin and his enthusiasm for a successful merger.

Last week, Mr. Karmazin took his campaign to win over lawmakers and regulators to Washington with his pitch that a single satellite radio company would mean more choice and lower prices for consumers — rather than create a foreboding monopoly, as his former chums in the terrestrial radio business contend.

Speaking before an antitrust task force of the House Judiciary Committee, Mr. Karmazin said he was shocked by the very idea that anyone would see a monopoly as the logical result of merging the only two satellite radio broadcasters. “There is no monopoly or duopoly,” he told the hearing. “That’s the most bizarre thing I have ever heard.”

Sirius and XM on Capitol Hill

As mentioned below, Sirius and XM are starting to ramp up their efforts to get their merger blessed.

Earlier today I happened upon their hearings on C-SPAN and was not surprised by their arguments. They maintain, of course, that there are innumerable ways for competitors to compete with satellite radio. Here's a brief list:

• Large terrestrial radio companies could provide high-quality nation-wide radio
• Cell phone companies could use their networks to distribute content which could then be played over car or home stereos via blue-tooth (yes, seems quite convoluted)
  
• A collection of 802.11 networks could be used to transmit high quality radio

I didn't watch for long, or else my list would be a lot longer.

I'm not sure how I feel about a merger. On the one hand, it seems that satellite radio is a true paradigm shift and that for other companies to provide similar services they'd have to do it through the satellite radio network. On the other hand, satellite radio doesn't seem that great. If it can't be outdone then I'd be amazed. And, I think, if the merger leads to better solutions, then let it go ahead.

BBC and YouTube

As reported by the BBC, the BBC has entered into a deal with YouTube that would create three new channels showing BBC content. One channel will be dedicated to clips of news programs, while the other two will focus on entertainment content.

Although other major content owners have entered into similar deals with YouTube, the motivations of the BBC may be slightly different from those of other companies. Presently, the BBC is funded almost entirely by money provided by tax payers in the UK. Accordingly, it is difficult for the BBC to provide content to people who reside outside of the UK. If they did, people in the UK would be understandably upset. After all, it's the citizens who are paying for the content to be created. To reach an international audience, the BBC must find a way for advertising revenue to offset the tax revenue.

Enter YouTube. A convenient and simple way for the BBC to share content and, at the same time, collect advertising revenue and please the people!