Author Topic: I hate journalistic writing (Read 101720 times)

A U.S. appeals court upheld rules that make it easier for companies like Google Inc. and Apple Inc. to get rid of worrisome patent litigation on the cheap.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in an appeal involving a patent for a speed limit indicator, took its first look at reviews by the Patent and Trademark Office. The decision Wednesday may benefit many companies not directly in the case by upholding rules that patent owners say make it too easy to get their legal protections tossed and led a former judge to dub the agency board a “death squad” for patents.

The first paragraph makes it sound like it's good for google and Apple—now it's easier for them to get rid of worrisome patent litigation.

But the second paragraph says that it's upholding rules that may lead to some companies losing legal protection for their patents. Isn't that a bad thing? And isn't that the opposite of what the first paragraph said?

Also, what's the agency board? There's been no mention of an agency or a board before. Is it the Patent and Trademark Office?

I guess I could try to muscle through the rest and figure it out, but I've already wasted enough brainpower on it. Trying to parse it is making my brain do this:

Keith · « **Reply #685 on:** February 09, 2015, 12:02:31 PM »

"Patent ‘Death Squad’ Rules Owners Denounce Upheld by U.S. Court"

Patent 'Death Squad' is an entity.

It makes rules:

"Patent ‘Death Squad’ Rules"

Patent owners denounce the rules:

"Patent ‘Death Squad’ Rules Owners Denounce"

The court upholds the rules:

"Patent ‘Death Squad’ Rules Owners Denounce Upheld by U.S. Court"

I think patents-that-should-never-have-been-granted both benefit and hurt lots of companies, including big players, which is not to defend the article which is terrible.

Jonathon · « **Reply #686 on:** February 09, 2015, 12:10:01 PM »

I'm still not seeing how that is a coherent and grammatical sentence, even in headlinese. You can't have two separate verbs in one sentence. Also, I still don't get the whole "patent 'death squad' rules owners" bit. Is that one big noun phrase or two separate phrases?

Wait. WAIT. I think I may have gotten it.

"[The] Patent 'Death Squad' Rules [That] [Patent?] Owners Denounce [Are] Upheld by U.S. Court"

Is that right?

Keith · « **Reply #687 on:** February 09, 2015, 12:38:36 PM »

Yep, that's what they were going for, as best I can tell.

dkw · « **Reply #688 on:** February 09, 2015, 02:30:57 PM »

And judging from the bit of article you quoted the patent owners that denounce the rules are the small patent holders whose claims are shot down by the big guys.

Jonathon · « **Reply #689 on:** February 09, 2015, 02:45:12 PM »

*lightbulb*

pooka · « **Reply #690 on:** March 07, 2015, 07:28:50 PM »

Did anyone else see the "WBS attempts to picket Leonard Nimoy's wedding" headline?

Porter · « **Reply #691 on:** March 08, 2015, 07:10:43 PM »

As a general rule, I treat all news about the WB Church the way I treat the unholy child of spam + troll.

I ignore it.

Jonathon · « **Reply #692 on:** March 08, 2015, 07:38:55 PM »

All I know is that they wanted to protest it and couldn't because they didn't know where it was.

Why they'd want to protest it is beyond me.

rivka · « **Reply #693 on:** March 08, 2015, 08:42:55 PM »

I expect pooka was noting that they got funeral and wedding confused.

Jonathon · « **Reply #694 on:** March 08, 2015, 09:13:20 PM »

Oh, I didn't catch that.

rivka · « **Reply #695 on:** March 08, 2015, 09:15:37 PM »

It took me a couple read-throughs to see it.

Porter · « **Reply #696 on:** March 09, 2015, 06:09:28 AM »

Quote

Why they'd want to protest it is beyond me.

Tolls don't need a reason.

Jonathon · « **Reply #697 on:** April 08, 2015, 09:46:20 AM »

This isn't so much the journalist's fault, but I still thought it was funny.

Quote

"[The boat] has little pointers at the front with electroshock. It stuns the fish. It doesn't kill them. They get stunned and they float to the surface and we can collect them," Churchill said.

In that scenario, the fish would then go to a raptor rehabilitation center as feed.

link

Oh, good! They're not going to kill the fish—they'll just stun them and then relocate them so they can be eaten by birds.

Tante Shvester · « **Reply #698 on:** April 08, 2015, 10:05:02 AM »

I'm picturing raptors with addiction problems.

Annie Subjunctive · « **Reply #699 on:** April 09, 2015, 08:27:33 PM »

They tried to make me go to rehab, and I said, "KEEEEEEEEEEEEE!"