So I finish writing a blog post about blatantly false information purveyed by attorney referral service, UpCounsel (which claims it isn’t a referral service, but that’s exactly what it does), and saw, after mere seconds, more false information.
This time UpCounsel says that provisional patent rights “are in force between the date of the patent application and the actual granting of the patent”
Umm, nope, wrong again. In the next paragraph it provides a different statement about those same rights, this time getting it right, at least in part:
Provisional rights exist only upon publication of the patent AND the claims that are ultimately allowed are “substantially identical.” 35 U.S.C. § 154(d).
I can’t imagine the lawyers that get clients through UpCounsel. How do they respond with the client says, “Well the UpCounsel website says _____, but you’re telling me something different.” How is their reputation as a lawyer affected when the source of the referral has information that they must then tell the client is wrong? Doesn’t that destroy the trust which is so vital to the attorney-client relationship? My goodness.
All of this begs the question about why the technocrats (or lawyers and judges) can’t bring to bear technology that helps produce consensus rather than perpetuates bad or outright false information? Why can’t I, as an experienced patent attorney report to Google or DuckDuckGo that a website has false information? Why no feedback to help avoid the social ill that results from truly false information?
If you want trustworthy advice, don’t rely on UpCounsel or similar SEO-referral drivel. Hire a lawyer who actually knows what they’re talking about. It will save you heartache and money.
NB: The irony of the last paragraph is not lost on me. I don’t post this blog primarily for SEO, but rather use it to vent and provide good, accurate information to the public.
Leave a Reply