About the Authors

  • The Authors and Contributors of "Patent Docs" are patent attorneys and agents, many of whom hold doctorates in a diverse array of disciplines.
2018 Juristant Badge - MBHB_165
Juristant #4 Overall Rank

E-mail Newsletter

  • Enter your e-mail address below to receive the "Patent Docs" e-mail newsletter.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Contact the Docs

Docs on Twitter


Disclaimer

  • "Patent Docs" does not contain any legal advice whatsoever. This weblog is for informational purposes only, and its publication does not create an attorney-client relationship. In addition, nothing on "Patent Docs" constitutes a solicitation for business. This weblog is intended primarily for other attorneys. Moreover, "Patent Docs" is the personal weblog of the Authors; it is not edited by the Authors' employers or clients and, as such, no part of this weblog may be so attributed. All posts on "Patent Docs" should be double-checked for their accuracy and current applicability.
Juristat_165
Juristat #8 Overall Rank

Pharma-50-transparent_216px_red

« Patent Reform Discussion Moves to House | Main | Reaction to House Patent Reform Bill »

March 30, 2011

Comments

I'm in Asia, will post anonomously of course, but my concern is that by commoditization of the whole patent process we are making the problem of bad patents worse. Where I am we have around 140 engineers, and up until two years ago only two US patent agents (now 3). We vacillate in the ranking between 25th and 15th in top filers for US patents. Imagine China, where it's going to be 1 US patent agent signing for 1000 engineers translating Chinese apps and flooding the USPTO. Just sayin'

Kevin,

The House version of S.23 is yet further reason why so-called "patent law reform" is a joke, and calling this the "America Invents Act" is oxymoronic. Prior user rights for all patented technologies? Including those practicing those patented technologies outside the U.S. (e.g., China)?

In my view, prior user rights is offensive to the intent of the Patent Clause in our Consitution. Where's the quid pro quo if someone can keep the technology "secret" and avoid the penalty of being barred by the one who pays the quid to get the quo? Be prepared for a constitutional challenge if this prior user right provision survives.

"In my view, prior user rights is offensive to the intent of the Patent Clause in our Consitution. Where's the quid pro quo if someone can keep the technology "secret" and avoid the penalty of being barred by the one who pays the quid to get the quo? Be prepared for a constitutional challenge if this prior user right provision survives. "

Not that I believe prior user rights to necessarily be the correct thing to put in our lawl, but I look forward to loling at your constitutional challenge to such a provision.

"Smith (R-TX) (at right), introduced a version of the America Invents Act "

Just because they call it “reform” doesn’t mean it is. Patent reform is a fraud on America. This bill will not do what they claim it will. What it will do is help large corporations maintain their monopolies by robbing and killing their small entity and startup competitors (so it will do exactly what they paid for) and with them the jobs they would have created. According to recent studies by the Kauffman Foundation and economists at the U.S. Census Bureau, “startups aren’t everything when it comes to job growth. They’re the only thing.” This bill is a wholesale slaughter of US jobs. Those wishing to help in the fight to defeat this bill should contact us as below.

Small entities have been given far too little voice on this bill when one considers that they rely far more heavily on the patent system than do large firms who can control their markets by their size alone. The smaller the firm, the more they rely on patents -especially startups and individual inventors. Yet small entities create the lion's share of new jobs.

Please see http://truereform.piausa.org/ for a different/opposing view on patent reform.
http://docs.piausa.org/

The comments to this entry are closed.

October 2019

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31