User talk:JamesGecko

Software patent debate
You have written: "Patent Failure" is also of questionable reliability, but that's another matter. ;-) Do you have a more authoritative source or countersource? --Swen 05:17, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I have a countersource pointing out a few of the issues with the book. (Full disclosure: I know the author). F. Russell Denton (2008). Plumb Lines Instead of a Wrecking Ball: A Model for Recalibrating Patent Scope. Journal of Intellectual Property Law, 16(1).
 * --JamesGecko (talk) 19:49, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Not accessible at the moment, but page 6 fn 19 mentions both in the same context without significant dissense (not as countersource).
 * --Swen 11:21, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Denton's article was written in response to Patent Failure, addresses many of the same points with different conclusions, and points out several critical factual errors which the authors of Patent Failure used to support their arguments. The title is referencing the destructive approach to software patent reform advocated by Bessen and Meurer. --JamesGecko (talk) 19:06, 30 June 2009 (UTC)