Lemley astonished that apportionment was controversial

Patent reform 2008 (S.1145) died over damages apportionment.

Here's what Mark Lemley said:


“I have to say I’m frankly astonished that apportionment has been this controversial,” said Mark A. Lemley, an intellectual-property scholar at Stanford who has testified in support of the legislation. “I can’t think of a straight-faced argument that you as a patent owner are entitled to more than your invention has contributed to a product.”

What, me worry?

With Obama getting patent advice from Lemley and Lessig, we can see where Obama is on patent reform.

[Above quote from Patent reform: Stopping the insanity or inventor ripoff?, Richard Koman, ZDNet Government] One can find on zdnet:

Is Cisco CEO John Chambers’ aggressive commitment this morning to a 25 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2012 just a ploy/play for green headlines? Actually, I think this very public very high-level move represents just the first part of a multi-layered program to get Cisco better positioned as a force to be reckoned with in the green tech space. And, I know that when you rally John Chambers behind something, things get done.

but nothing on Cisco's Rick Frenkel as the (once) anonymous patent troll tracker.