On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 11:16 PM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, 16 Jul 2008, Quazie wrote: >>> [Aside: when something is undefined, therefore ceasing to exist, >>> is a thing which is later redefined under the same name the same >>> thing?] >>> >> Sounds like a CFJ to me. > > Actually, in this case I'm pretty sure the continuity of the patent > title (continuing to be officially held while undefined) means it's > the same thing. -Goethe >
Was the definition the same the first time it existed in comparison to now? If not, I would argue that they were different.
