Patent Hawk Files Supreme Court Brief On Behalf Of All Oregon; Oregon Officials Say 'Who?'
from the good-work! dept
You may recall that a guy named Gary Odom, who refers to himself often in the third person as "Patent Hawk," has been known to stop by here every so often to insult us without ever, you know, backing up a point. His day job is helping companies do patent/prior art searches. Last year, he made a bit of news by suing Microsoft for a patent he held on "editable toolbars" (exciting stuff). Microsoft later accused him of violating a contract, in that Odom (whoops) had worked for Microsoft, and had an agreement about not filing for certain types of patents, or asserting them against Microsoft.Now, with the Supreme Court agreeing to hear the Bilski case, which could have a big impact on the patentability of software and business models, a bunch of folks have been dutifully filing their amici briefs attempting to convince the Supreme Court one way or the other. These latest briefs more or less reflect what was in the original briefs filed prior to the CAFC ruling. Still, there was one interesting one: Odom and a buddy filed their own brief (which Odom, again in the third person praised his own brief as being "cogently potent in its brevity and conservatism" -- nothing like patting oneself on the back).
The brief itself is fine (though I believe a bit misleading in what it leaves out... but that's what these briefs tend to do). However, what stood out, was the odd claim on the brief that it was filed on behalf of the State of Oregon (where Odom resides). That's quite a claim... and it appears the State of Oregon, in the form of its Attorney General, doesn't agree with Odom that this represents the state:
Tony Green, a spokesman for the Oregon Attorney General, said no one in his office had heard of Odom's purported statewide representation before [Joe Mullin at The Prior Art] called. "It is our preference that people accurately convey who they're writing an amicus brief on behalf of," says Green. "We neither authorized this or had any knowledge of it."Of course, Green also points out that the Supreme Court figured out that Odom's claim to represent the State of Oregon was backed up with about as much weight as his typical insults, and properly filed the brief as just being from Odom and his friend, rather than the state of Oregon.
![Hide This Hide this](https://ii.techdirt.com/s/t/i/topclose.png)
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: bilski, gary odom, oregon, patent hawk
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Really?
Often?
Mike, c'mon.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Really?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Really?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Really?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Really?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Really?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Really?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Right
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Impersonation of a Person in Authority or just Fraud ?
They should.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Impersonation of a Person in Authority or just Fraud ?
Odom obvioulsy doesn't care about his reputation.
Pulling stuff like this, how can people really take him seriously?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bleh!
Perhaps I should sue him for mental distress. :-P
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Patent Hawk
If you want to find prickly over ripe ego's look no farther then your own clients at M$.
Keep your day job.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Patent Hawk
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Leave Hawkie alone !
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
With so many briefs basically hiding their points within long winded dissertations, it is a pleasure to read one that isn't.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Smart guy, bad tactics
So my advice - take what he says with a grain of salt. The attacks are the norm and I usually don't agree with his opinions, but there's almost always something entertaining in what he has to say.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Um... IANAL, but
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
stop the shilling!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: stop the shilling!!!
I find this quite funny, since I pretty much disagree with everything Microsoft says about patents: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081020/1938442601.shtml
Not only that, but I've pointed it out to you guys before. So why do you keep insisting otherwise?
You don't build credibility by stating stuff that is demonstrably false.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: stop the shilling!!!
BTW, United Nations and I announce you to be of no significance.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lets all jump on the attack Mike bandwagon
[ link to this | view in chronology ]