Patently-O and the Top 100 Legal Blogs: Vote Here
The ABA Journal has again chosen Patently-O as one of the top-100 legal blogs along with Gene & Renee Quinn's IP Watchdog and Evan Brown's Internet Cases. This is the fifth year that the ABA Journal has published this list, and Patently-O has made the list each and every year.
We've made a number of major improvements to Patently-O's coverage over the past year. Most notably, Professor Jason Rantanen is now a co-author, Lawrence Higgins is covering Bits and Bytes, and we have published a number of excellent guest posts both on the blog and in the associated short form Law Journal. Ryan Swarts is managing the Patently-O Job Board and he reports that we've had more job postings the past year than ever before (36 last month) and more readers as well (500,000 page views).
Some Stats: During the past year there have been more than 700,000 unique visitors to the Patently-O website and the vast majority of visits are return-visits. In addition, these days well over 20,000 patent law professionals receive Patently-O through a free daily e-mail service.
We have several projects that we hope to implement over course of the next few months. Most importantly, we'll be rolling-out a complete of the site on a new blogging platform that allows for better control of comments through moderation and comment-ranking as well as easier navigation through the site archives and a high quality mobile version of the site. We're also talking with several potential regular contributors who could provide additional case studies on patent prosecution, litigation, examination and licensing. As always, please let me know if you have concerns or ideas for the site. dcrouch@patentlyo.com.
How can you help: In addition to the top-100 list, the ABA is also holding a popularity contest. I would appreciate your vote in the IP Law Category. To vote, you have to register but you don't have to provide the ABA with actual identifying information. VOTE HERE.
Thanks again!
Dennis
Patently-O 
“….better control of comments…..” I’ll vote for that. Many thanks for all the effort, and best of luck in the poll, to Dennis and all members of Team Crouch. You certainly deserve far more votes than any other patent blog.
“We’ve made a number of major improvements to Patently-O’s coverage over the past year.”
Were 6 and Malcolm banned when I wasn’t watching???!!!
No. They were not banned.
However, their “wit” and more in line, their relevance has been sharply curtailed with a number of posters refusing to simply accept their conclusory statements and asking instead for real legal reasoning and substance to back up the positions posted.
This typically results in the paper policy table folding after being pounded (and one MaxDrei wistfully wishing for the old days).
“….better control of comments…..”
I’ll be looking forward to that, DC. Even with the sockpuppets/Quinnbots doing their best to wreck every other thread, the comments here are still more useful and interesting than those of any other patent blog.
Keep up the great work.
Yes, delighted to hear that “Most importantly, we’ll be rolling-out a complete of the site on a new blogging platform that allows for better control of comments through moderation and comment-ranking as well as easier navigation through the site archives..”
It seems to me that even the previous discoverers of the inconspicuous small-print “comments” hotlink at the bottom of each blog have been extensively turned off by all the exercises in pure gestalt hostility therapy missing any attempt at substantive comments. [In contrast, Gene Quinn’s IP Watchdog seems to already have been filtering out a lot of that.]
Also, now that the AIA is a done deal, those who were just foaming at the mouth at the thought of any patent law changes can now hopefully concentrate on pointing out its serious specific defects and ambiguities that need a technical corrections bill.
“Even with the sockpuppets/Quinnbots doing their best to wreck every other thread”
Right . . . now we can add paranoia to MM’s exhaustive list of faults.
Hey, maybe they followed you ever here. That Eugene Quinn, he must have it out for you! Quick, close the shades, turn off the lights, and don’t answer the door. It might be, Eugene Quinn! Lolz! Take a prozac, yo!
“Foaming?”
Malcolm, I never thought of deliberate sabotage. But it is possible.
“Were 6 and Malcolm banned when I wasn’t watching???!!!”
Guess who one of the regular contributors is :p
Fix? Simple: an inventor should be able to remove prior art less than a year old as he can now by proving prior invention; with the exception of an (effectively) earlier-filed US patent application claiming the same invention.
The first-to-file will get the patent thereby eliminating interferences.
However, we will still have an effective grace period with respect to all other intervening art.
We could then remove all this new and untried experiment about a prior public disclosure effectively reserving a filing date. That whole concept, while interesting, is not really workable from the standpoint of international protection that requires that the invention not be disclosed at all prior to filing.
I voted for Patently-O. Now where’s my “I voted” sticker?