Just a thought.
It is already becoming common knowledge that there is a large number of jobs that have simply no value for society at large. They exist to provide work (one of the greatest examples would be in Japan where you can see old guys standing at the exit of construction sites to stop cars when trucks get out/come in. The geezers often need the work because they have to wait a few years between the time they retire and the moment they get their retirement pension)
One of the consequences is how little Japanese people know about what the imperial army was up to in the 1930's. Considering that, even today, Japan is essentially an US dominion, that was only possible because the American government allowed it.
However, when making that kind of judgement, or excuses, it is then necessary to wonder whether the position considered modern was expressed in any way at the time the person considered lived in.
Case in point, there were quite a few very vocal voices against slavery in the late 18th century. Enough to show that on that point at the very least, the US constitution is much less a semi-divine document and much more the result of haggling over specific interests. The point being that you shouldn't be so quick to excuse people because of the "different age" excuse.
If they were federal and not some federal-in-name-only, they would all operate under the exact same rules.
To the best of my understanding, patents should squarely fall within the scope of inter-state commerce. As such, and even with the strictest, most conservative interpretation of the US Constitution, it feels like any case related to them ought to be treated according to Federal laws.
How come it is considered acceptable to judge such cases at a local level and thus with wildly different standards depending on which court it is presented to?
Science is topics such as maths, physics biology and the like. Don't be fooled by the use of statistics: economics is anything but a real science (despite the continued propaganda about that). If it were a real science, you couldn't analyse events with theories based on exactly opposite axioms, and it could predict future events accurately (as opposed to only accurately predicting past events, as does now).
People who are at the origin of intellectual creation have to come to term with one very simple fact: they lose any kind of proprietary rights the moment they release their creation to the public (whatever it is you've made, however it inspires me, what's inside my head isn't yours). That is the very nature of such things. What society has decided is to grant them a monopoly in the reproduction rights of said work. Of course, when compared with what this right was originally, it has been abused on a scale beyond imagination (but commensurate with the wish most people have to get a rent of whatever kind forever).
That shouldn't be a surprise to anyone on slashdot, really. "Stealth" technology has nothing in common with Star Trek like cloaking, it simply is a matter of reducing the signature. With greater computer power available, it was only a question of time until it became obsolete.
Of course, all of that is without even talking about how unreliable and fragile the stealth tech really is (the coating must be redone after each sortie and is vulnerable to rain, among other problems)...
A continuing flow of paper is sufficient to continue the flow of paper. -- Dyer