Re: Seen on aus.legal
From: Peter T. Daniels (grammatim_at_worldnet.att.net)
Date: 11/30/04
- Next message: Peter T. Daniels: "Re: Hindi and Farsi counting words are identical"
- Previous message: Peter T. Daniels: "Re: The Origin of the middle finger."
- In reply to: benlizross: "Re: Seen on aus.legal"
- Next in thread: John Atkinson: "Re: Seen on aus.legal"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 00:01:35 GMT
benlizross wrote:
>
> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >
> > John Atkinson wrote:
> > >
> > > "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@worldnet.att.net> wrote...
> > >
> > > > Jacques Guy wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > "This is presumably because the parties previously agreed
> > > > > that the property could be caveated or an agreement touched
> > > > > on the property to enable it to be caveated"
> > > >
> > > > It's probably something specific to Australian law.
> > >
> > > No. Putting a caveat on a property is pretty common in British and Canadian
> > > legal practise too. I'm sure you have something equivalent in US property
> > > law -- maybe you call it something else?
> >
> > That's what I said. "Put a caveat on" is not the same word as
> > "caveated," which ought to be "caveatted," no?
> >
> > > I understand US patent law allows you to "caveat" an invention before taking
> > > out a patent on it.
> >
> > I don't think it's called that.
> > --
> > Peter T. Daniels grammatim@att.net
>
> There's an old Big Webster next door and occasionally I like to wipe the
> grime off it and look something up. (The title page is missing, but the
> Preface is dated 1909.)
That would be the First International. (Not nearly so widely available
as the 2nd!)
> caveat n. 1a. Eng.Patent Law. A notice filed upon an application for
> renewal of a patent by a person who wishes to oppose the renewal.
> 1b. U.S.Patent Laws. A notice given to the Patent Office of the
> caveator's claim as inventor, in order to prevent the grant of a patent
> to another person for the same alleged invention...
>
> caveat v.i. 1. To enter a caveat.
>
> So there is, or was, such a term in US patent law, but the absence of a
> v.t. would preclude "caveated". This as of 1909. Updates to follow.
It's not in the 11th Collegiate (2003).
-- Peter T. Daniels grammatim@att.net
- Next message: Peter T. Daniels: "Re: Hindi and Farsi counting words are identical"
- Previous message: Peter T. Daniels: "Re: The Origin of the middle finger."
- In reply to: benlizross: "Re: Seen on aus.legal"
- Next in thread: John Atkinson: "Re: Seen on aus.legal"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|