<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Rethinker&#8217;s response to Guy Kawasaki&#8217;s defensibility question</title>
	<atom:link href="http://promotetheprogress.com/blog/a-rethinkers-response-to-guy-kawasakis-defensibility-question/595/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://promotetheprogress.com/blog/a-rethinkers-response-to-guy-kawasakis-defensibility-question/595/</link>
	<description>Analytical commentary on current issues in United States patent law</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 12:57:17 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: J. Matthew Buchanan</title>
		<link>http://promotetheprogress.com/blog/a-rethinkers-response-to-guy-kawasakis-defensibility-question/595/comment-page-1/#comment-142</link>
		<dc:creator>J. Matthew Buchanan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Nov 2006 19:44:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unitedstates.promotetheprogress.com/2006/11/07/a-rethinkers-response-to-guy-kawasakis-defensibility-question/#comment-142</guid>
		<description>The nuance of our response - which, admittedly, we could have un-nuanced a bit - is that we warn against following the "patent everything!" mentality that is espoused by many.  A better answer than "we've got patents" to the defensibility question is, we think, "we've developed a comprehensive intellectual property strategy that is custom-tailored to our industry."  Patents may play a large or small role in that strategy...and indeed may play no role at all in some industries.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The nuance of our response - which, admittedly, we could have un-nuanced a bit - is that we warn against following the &#8220;patent everything!&#8221; mentality that is espoused by many.  A better answer than &#8220;we&#8217;ve got patents&#8221; to the defensibility question is, we think, &#8220;we&#8217;ve developed a comprehensive intellectual property strategy that is custom-tailored to our industry.&#8221;  Patents may play a large or small role in that strategy&#8230;and indeed may play no role at all in some industries.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephan Kinsella</title>
		<link>http://promotetheprogress.com/blog/a-rethinkers-response-to-guy-kawasakis-defensibility-question/595/comment-page-1/#comment-141</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephan Kinsella</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Nov 2006 05:48:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unitedstates.promotetheprogress.com/2006/11/07/a-rethinkers-response-to-guy-kawasakis-defensibility-question/#comment-141</guid>
		<description>Wow--patent attorneys arguing for the importance of ... patents and patenting. Go figure! :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow&#8211;patent attorneys arguing for the importance of &#8230; patents and patenting. Go figure! <img src='http://promotetheprogress.com/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
