4 ms·

Not documenting it makes it harder to escape the scrutiny by rewriting your patent applications. It is far easier to game such a system if you know precisely ho

by sgift 12y ago

Not documenting it makes it harder to escape the scrutiny by rewriting your patent applications. It is far easier to game such a system if you know precisely how it works.

sitkack 12y ago
Following the law is easy when u can read it.
- Istof 12y ago
  if you are an attorney in the field, maybe.
  - angersock 12y ago
    Well, it's damned difficult to follow laws that aren't written down.
    - kbenson 12y ago
      I think it's important to distinguish what we are talking about here. We aren't talking about a hidden law, we are talking about internal procedures that attempt to make sure the law is following by identifying patents likely to cause problems and looking at them closer. The same published laws apply, they just look closer to make sure it in line with them. It's important to remember that the patent system is for the benefit of society. It achieves this benefit by incentivizing the individual. We must be sure to make sure when we apply the rules for the patent system we aren't capricious and discriminatory, but we need to be very aware that the benefits provided to the individual by a patent are not the purpose of the patent system, but simply the method used to a achieve it's true purpose. That purpose is very clear in the constitution as "To promote the progress of science and useful arts."
      - dnautics 12y ago
        just because that's it's stated purpose doesn't mean it's magically achieving it. You can't take that the patent system promotes the progress of science and useful arts as axiomatic gospel. How do you judge how successful it is if there isn't at the very least retrospective transparency and a way to hold the system accountable for its procedures?
- Symmetry 12y ago
  The thing we're discussing isn't a law, it's an internal agency procedure. It might or might not be a good idea but it's nothing anyone outside the agency has to follow.
  - honksillet 12y ago
    Internal agency procedure should be 100% transparent. "This is how we do things in this department" isn't a valid excuse for anything.
    - peeters 12y ago
      So the IRS should document (for public consumption) the exact algorithm it uses to decide which filings get extra scrutiny? Doesn't that open the door to quite a bit of abuse? (i.e. tax fraudsters being able to match just the precise set of conditions to not be audited).
      - caboteria 12y ago
        Yes, the IRS should. The fraudsters (and rich people with expensive accountants) already have this info, for example by hiring former IRS examiners and executives. Making the algorithms public at least puts everyone on equal footing.
  - sitkack 12y ago
    Very few governmental systems should operate in secret. Agency procedure _is_ defacto law. If they have a non-documented system for stalling, sidelining or giving greater scrutiny to patents yet have a 1500 page operations manual doesn't that strike you as odd?
DINKDINK 12y ago
So why don't we keep all laws hidden? One could expand your argument at any and all laws. Why write down the laws for "money laundering" as it would <s> only allow people to skirt the laws </s>. If you don't right down the law and keep its enforcement procedurally, the laws are often misapplied to constrict those that are undesirable by the state (either through political resistance, the politically unconnected, or disrupters)

by sgift 12y ago

Not documenting it makes it harder to escape the scrutiny by rewriting your patent applications. It is far easier to game such a system if you know precisely how it works.

sitkack 12y ago

Following the law is easy when u can read it.

Istof 12y ago
if you are an attorney in the field, maybe.
- angersock 12y ago
  Well, it's damned difficult to follow laws that aren't written down.
  - kbenson 12y ago
    I think it's important to distinguish what we are talking about here. We aren't talking about a hidden law, we are talking about internal procedures that attempt to make sure the law is following by identifying patents likely to cause problems and looking at them closer. The same published laws apply, they just look closer to make sure it in line with them. It's important to remember that the patent system is for the benefit of society. It achieves this benefit by incentivizing the individual. We must be sure to make sure when we apply the rules for the patent system we aren't capricious and discriminatory, but we need to be very aware that the benefits provided to the individual by a patent are not the purpose of the patent system, but simply the method used to a achieve it's true purpose. That purpose is very clear in the constitution as "To promote the progress of science and useful arts."
    - dnautics 12y ago
      just because that's it's stated purpose doesn't mean it's magically achieving it. You can't take that the patent system promotes the progress of science and useful arts as axiomatic gospel. How do you judge how successful it is if there isn't at the very least retrospective transparency and a way to hold the system accountable for its procedures?
Symmetry 12y ago
The thing we're discussing isn't a law, it's an internal agency procedure. It might or might not be a good idea but it's nothing anyone outside the agency has to follow.
- honksillet 12y ago
  Internal agency procedure should be 100% transparent. "This is how we do things in this department" isn't a valid excuse for anything.
  - peeters 12y ago
    So the IRS should document (for public consumption) the exact algorithm it uses to decide which filings get extra scrutiny? Doesn't that open the door to quite a bit of abuse? (i.e. tax fraudsters being able to match just the precise set of conditions to not be audited).
    - caboteria 12y ago
      Yes, the IRS should. The fraudsters (and rich people with expensive accountants) already have this info, for example by hiring former IRS examiners and executives. Making the algorithms public at least puts everyone on equal footing.
- sitkack 12y ago
  Very few governmental systems should operate in secret. Agency procedure _is_ defacto law. If they have a non-documented system for stalling, sidelining or giving greater scrutiny to patents yet have a 1500 page operations manual doesn't that strike you as odd?

DINKDINK 12y ago

So why don't we keep all laws hidden? One could expand your argument at any and all laws. Why write down the laws for "money laundering" as it would <s> only allow people to skirt the laws </s>. If you don't right down the law and keep its enforcement procedurally, the laws are often misapplied to constrict those that are undesirable by the state (either through political resistance, the politically unconnected, or disrupters)