Thanks for an interesting read.

http://www.agoracom.com/ir/patriot/m...

I really liked what he said here:

"Further, Congressional committees, in preparing their reports, ignored huge chucks of evidence. The fix was in."

And here:

"One of the ironies, to me, of this legislative intervention as it now exists is that the overall theme is there's too much patent litigation, it's too expensive, and it takes too long. But if you add an interlocutory appeals stage that doesn't exist now, you add a whole other year, remember 11 months on average, and you add more cost. So how are you achieving the goal of reducing cost and reducing patent litigation, speeding it up, by adding additional layers?"

"Now, the second thing that interests me about the section dealing with interlocutory appeals, it's section eight of the bill; it also deals with venue but I'm not going to get into that because of inadequate time. But if you look at the footnote, and they're on pages 26, 27, and 28, the report relies on the testimony, oral testimony at two or three hearings that the Senate had, of essentially three or four people. And they're all extremely bright people. I know some of them; I admire them greatly. But of course they're speaking for their particular companies, so when you read the footnotes you'll see that it's the witness for Goldman Sachs quoted again and again and again; it's the witness for J.P. Morgan quoted again and again and again; it's the witness for Visa quoted again and again and again. Nothing wrong with that because they have a legitimate point to make, and they make it very well. But what seems to be entirely missing is any quotes of testimony in a larger context from any of the scores of other industries."

"Michel indicates Congressional tunnel vision; see-no-evil in reverse .."

“…it seems to me we shouldn't be legislating based on assumptions or myths, or assertions by witnesses for 10 companies when the witnesses for the other 3,000 companies in the country are not heard from. That doesn't seem like a sound approach; it wouldn't be sound approach for a court, and I wonder if it's a sound approach for the Congress.”

"Keep in mind that the academics are not the driving force; they are just part of the circus act. Follow the money to find out who set up the circus, who got Congress blabbering patents in the first place, who rigged the game."

You're always on top of things Wolf - Thanks so much.

“Excellence is an art won by training and habituation. We do not act rightly because we have virtue or excellence, but rather we have those because we have acted rightly. We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.” à Aristotle

Cheers, DW