Lemme say this about that.... (the link)
I have seen and attempted to read & wrap my head around some significant portion of that several times past. My take: no one could understand most of it or even be able to read it w/o wanting to hurt themselves... unless they were a genius/idiot sevant, w/photographic memory, on heavy dose of meth & offered large amts of money & their wife/husband left them..... OR..... a patent attorney (possible the same thing??).
I'm not sure if you seriously think I could find the answers with which to make a reasonable comparison of the 2 patents (lawful & legal). Even when I can grasp some small part of it, the sheer volume crushes any hope of putting enough of it together to make any serious sense out of it. It's worse than "legal-ease"..there ain't nothin ease about it. So I wonder if you having a little chuckle at my expense? Lol... if so, please do..!
Besides comparing the dates of applications, denials & approval, which I thought might help me see how things jived, yes, I'd love to be able to see just how similar or dissimilar the 2 LI applications are, techno wise, but heck, that's just too much to deal with. Within 5 minutes of trying to get even a small grip on finding what it would take to make any comparison, I want to close my eyes or run.
So I would like to know how anyone who has deemed the MS technology to be so similar, did so? What kind of jury could ever sit thru & sift thru such a morass of lines, abstract facts & figures, and such a proprietary set of terms & meanings..
No on 2nd thought, I don't wanna know. Not personally. I just want some 3rd party expert(s) to verify or deny the 2 LI inventions are essentially the same. That's all. Maybe it's asking too much...
