More Calls To Reform The Patent System

from the it's-bash-intellectual-property-laws-day dept

Earlier today we posted an article about how copyright law was harming, not helping, innovation. To go with that, how about an article from the Washington Post about how the patent system is harming, not helping, innovation. While the first article looked at DMCA smack-down suits, this one looks at all of the little patent shops that buy up ridiculous patents, don't actually build anything, wait for someone else (completely independently) to build something similar, and then sue them. It also looks at big companies who patent thousands of ideas every year, and then threaten any small company that might compete with them to "license our patents or else." The article mentions that many are hopeful that the resignation of the current USPTO directer will encourage real reform (despite all the praise he's receiving for being a "reformer"). From the quotes from the incoming director, though, I wouldn't hold my breath. In response to an FTC report that loudly questions the current patent system, the new USPTO director basically says that his hands are tied by treaty agreements the US has. He is happy, however, that the FTC suggests the patent office gets more money. Big surprise there. The money will go to more patent examiners, which just means that bad patents will get approved that much faster. What's needed is a real rethinking of the process. If the point of patents is to encourage innovation, we need to see if that's really happening or (if as appears in many cases) it's really just legalized extortion.

1 Comments | Leave a Comment..


If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
 

Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  

    Collaborative Patent System

    identicon
    Stephen Jones, Jan 21st, 2004 @ 8:48pm

    Maybe the Internet is the answer. What if we adopted a collaborative, peer-reviewed model for patent review? This would be a sort of Project Greenlight for patents where if you submit one you have to review five. The best rated patents would bubble up the review pyramid and only the top, most original 200 patents (say) would be granted each month.

    This would end complaints about backlog, lame patents, ignorance of prior art, etc. At the same time this scheme might actually restore the luster of innovation that patents once had before they became a backroom lottery for lawyers.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>


A word from our Sponsors...
Follow Techdirt
Flattr rss rss
From the Techdirt Archive...
A word from our Sponsors...

Close

Email This