<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Bilski &#8211; A Judicial Reaction To A Bureaucratic Problem?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.gartner.com/brian_prentice/2008/11/08/bilski-a-judicial-reaction-to-a-bureaucratic-problem/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.gartner.com/brian_prentice/2008/11/08/bilski-a-judicial-reaction-to-a-bureaucratic-problem/</link>
	<description>A member of the Gartner Blog Network</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Dec 2011 15:44:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anthony Bradley</title>
		<link>http://blogs.gartner.com/brian_prentice/2008/11/08/bilski-a-judicial-reaction-to-a-bureaucratic-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-10</link>
		<dc:creator>Anthony Bradley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Nov 2008 17:00:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.gartner.com/brian_prentice/2008/11/08/bilski-a-judicial-reaction-to-a-bureaucratic-problem/#comment-10</guid>
		<description>An interesting article in The Economist (by far my favorite news magazine) last fall covered the unmanageable workload of the USPTO. http://www.economist.com/science/tq/displaystory.cfm?story_id=E1_JSTJDND (I think the full article is only available to subscribers). This, of course, leads to a vast number of approved patents that don&#039;t meet existing criteria. You can put in place all the rules you want but if they aren&#039;t enforced then you accomplish nothing (except maybe shifting the workload to the legal system). 

The article goes on to talk about new USPTO initiatives around using Web 2.0 to get the community involved in investigating and vetting submissions. Halleluiah!!!! Now we are getting somewhere. I speak to a Federal Government organization almost everyday about Web 2.0 and social applications. This is another example that government is taking the Web 2.0 bull by the horns. 

That said, and getting back to the original post, complexity and vagueness in the rules makes it that much harder to leverage the community as part of the execution solution.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>An interesting article in The Economist (by far my favorite news magazine) last fall covered the unmanageable workload of the USPTO. <a href="http://www.economist.com/science/tq/displaystory.cfm?story_id=E1_JSTJDND" rel="nofollow">http://www.economist.com/science/tq/displaystory.cfm?story_id=E1_JSTJDND</a> (I think the full article is only available to subscribers). This, of course, leads to a vast number of approved patents that don&#8217;t meet existing criteria. You can put in place all the rules you want but if they aren&#8217;t enforced then you accomplish nothing (except maybe shifting the workload to the legal system). </p>
<p>The article goes on to talk about new USPTO initiatives around using Web 2.0 to get the community involved in investigating and vetting submissions. Halleluiah!!!! Now we are getting somewhere. I speak to a Federal Government organization almost everyday about Web 2.0 and social applications. This is another example that government is taking the Web 2.0 bull by the horns. </p>
<p>That said, and getting back to the original post, complexity and vagueness in the rules makes it that much harder to leverage the community as part of the execution solution.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

