Home | Subscribe | Post a Job | Advertise | Contact
« The Sedona Conference's new regional patent litigation programs |
| Filing Lead-Up to Full Implementation of the First-To-File AIA Regime »
Professor Epstein: "I am not perfect, as generations can testify, but at least I don't use power point."
Posted on Mar 20, 2013 at 02:45 PM | Permalink
| Save to del.icio.us
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Ha! I assume this is the wonderful Professor David Epstein from the University of Richmond. Good for him.
Mar 20, 2013 at 04:12 PM
obviously he is not a recent MBA graduate
Fish scales |
Mar 20, 2013 at 09:25 PM
what's power point ?
Mar 21, 2013 at 08:42 AM
Huh. I was assuming Professor Richard Epstein, from NYU and the University of Chicago.
Mar 21, 2013 at 04:59 PM
It's Richard Epstein (NYU), from:
Mar 28, 2013 at 12:37 PM
Ewwww. That Epstein. Another libert-rdian mouthbreather.
[Epstein] argues that the Civil Rights Act and other anti-discrimination legislation would be better if repealed.
Nobody could have predicted that a wealthy white libert-rdian would feel that way.
a policy advisor for The Heartland Institute.
Oh right. These guys:
On May 4, 2012, the institute launched a digital billboard ad campaign in the Chicago area featuring a photo of Ted Kaczynski, (the "Unabomber" whose mail bombs k-lled three people and injured 23 others), and asking the question, “I still believe in global warming, do you?” The institute planned for the campaign to feature m-rderer Charles Manson, communist leader Fidel Castro and perhaps Osama bin Laden, asking the same question. In a statement, the institute justified the billboards saying "the most prominent advocates of global warming aren’t scientists. They are m-rderers, tyrants, and madmen."
It'd be difficult to find a bigger group of greedy m0r0ns trying to stuff their pockets at everyone else's expense. Except maybe at the Hoover Institute or the Cato Institute. Oh wait, Epstein is grifting off of them, too. What a great country.
Mar 28, 2013 at 01:37 PM
and this has to do with patent law.... how?
Mar 28, 2013 at 02:27 PM
his has to do with patent law.... how?
Among other highly dubious writings, Epstein filed a brief on behalf of Bilski. He's a libert0rdian wanker who favors expansive patent rights (go figure) and who also happens to be profoundly clueless, as you can see from his eagerness to lend his name to embarassing anti-science escapades that undoubtedly function to keep his pockets and the pockets of his friends exceedingly well-lined.
He's on your team, anon. Give him a kiss.
Mar 28, 2013 at 03:00 PM
The topic is completely separate from patent law.
I care not at all about proclivities not associated with patent law. I would think that someone such as yourself, with avowed homosexu@l leanings would be the first in line to decry such discriminatory tactics instead of being the active producers of such claptrap. "My side" has nothing whatsoever to do with non-patent law topics.
Can you at the very least keep your soapboxing on the general topic of patent law please?
Mar 28, 2013 at 03:24 PM
"My side" has nothing whatsoever to do with non-patent law topics.
Again, Richard Epstein is a notable pundit in the patent world with decidedly pro-software patent and bizmeth patent leanings. He's beloved, of course, by many, including your hero, Gene "Just the Facts" Quinn. It's interesting to see "where he's coming from", if you get my drift. Isn't that something you are usually intensely focused on, Mr. Agenda Sniffer?
Speaking of which, there's a classic example of SuperFactMan doing his thing in the comments, where he writes:
You say that patent trolls that go through a full trial win 15% of the time. What about the 98% of patent cases that settle?
Uh ... what about them? Again, the facts are out there for all to read: (1) NPE patent suits have a lower (and decreasing) success rate than those brought by practicing entities; (2) "the 'most litigated' (8x or more) NPE patents lose more than 90% of the time in court. Data provided by RPX found that such repeat litigants dominate PAE cases – 61% of defendants named in 2011-2012 were sued by a PAE who had brought the case 8+ times".
But FactMaster Quinn is sure that patent trolls are all about the "innovation" and keeping those "copiers" in line. Oh, and of course PAE's also ensure that those poor, beleaguered small inventors and their lovely children don't starve in our harsh anti-patent proto-Stalinist political environment.
Mar 28, 2013 at 04:10 PM
Things completely irrelevant to patent law used in an obvious smear campaign.
The word for you: Hypocrite
Mar 28, 2013 at 04:45 PM
Things completely irrelevant to patent law
Like money? Like markets free of meddlesome government meddling except when that meddling provides a fun playground for the already wealthy to siphon yet more money out of the pocket's of ordinary people (otherwise known as "copiers" or "thieves")? Those sorts of irrelevant things?
Mar 28, 2013 at 05:33 PM
Like "Another libert-rdian mouthbreather. [Epstein] argues that the Civil Rights Act"
Prof. Crouch, can we get some relief from this shtt?
Seriously? This is not even remotely tied to patent law.
Mar 28, 2013 at 07:06 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.
Jason Rantanen, Associate ProfessorUniversity of IowaCollege of LawSSRN Articles
Occasional guest posts by IP practitioners and academics