Current Insight Community Cases

Justifying Your Datacenter Management Improvements

Essential Datacenter Tips On Application Performance Monitoring

The Importance Of Skilled Immigrants To The American Economy

Help A New Kind of Music Label Revolutionize The Industry

Mandates To Buy American Should Be More Carefully Considered

Shut Us Up

-- For Only $100 Million

Brought to you by Floor64 and the Techdirt crew.

stories filed under: "peer to patent"
Failures

Failures

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
obviousness, patents, peer to patent, prior art



Peer-To-Patent Quietly Shuts Down

from the and-no-one-notices... dept

While I'm certainly a big fan of involving more people in the process of reviewing patents, I've been a huge skeptic of the "Peer-to-Patent" program that the USPTO tested over the past few years. As I noted earlier, there's very little incentive for most people to actually get involved in peer reviewing a patent that early on. It's only much later when the patent actually becomes an issue (i.e., someone is asserting it somehow) that it really becomes an issue (especially when they're claiming it covers something that appears to be totally unrelated). However, there were many who promoted peer-to-patent as some sort of savior of the patent system.

And yet... the entire program apparently shut down last month and almost no one noticed (thanks to Eric Goldman for sending this over). They claim that the program is being "reviewed," but no more patents are being accepted into the program, and the few that are already in are expected to be finished in the next few months.

Again, having multiple people look in on patents is a good idea, but the setup of this particular program was incredibly flawed from the very start. There wasn't much incentive to participate from either end, and so the program didn't go very far or come up with very much useful. Also, it focused too much on "prior art" as an indicator of "obviousness" when the two are separate things (though, they may be related). It's great that the USPTO was open to experiments on improving patent quality, but this one never seemed to have much going for it.

16 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Overhype

Overhype

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
patents, peer review, peer to patent



Is Peer Review Really Enough To Help The Patent System?

from the not-really dept

For a few years now, there's been a push to open up the patent process to peer review using a system called Peer-To-Patent. It launched a couple years ago, and the Associated Press is running an article suggesting that it can help fix many of the patent system's problems. While I'm not against the idea of Peer-to-Patent, it appears that supporters of the system are overplaying it, while downplaying the many weaknesses of the program.

First of all, the AP report makes the same mistake many people do in suggesting that prior art is the equivalent of obviousness. The two are separate conditions related to patent approval. You can have obviousness without prior art, so repeating the myth that prior art is what's needed to show obviousness doesn't help matters.

But the bigger problem, only mentioned briefly at the very end of the article, is that most of the time the problem with patent lawsuits is that no one who looked at the patent would have thought it actually applied to the technology that it's being used against. People are filing incredibly broad patents, waiting for others to create successful technologies that might, sorta-if-you-squint infringe -- and then suing. Those types of patents aren't caught by the peer review process. In fact, a big part of the problem is actually getting the right people to look at those patents while they're in the peer review stage. Most people don't have the time to sort through the Peer-to-Patent list and see if they spot anything that's relevant to them. So, the folks who are skilled in the art probably aren't looking, and the patent gets through -- and only becomes an issue later. If peer review is going to be useful, at the very least, examiners should go looking for those actually skilled in the art to get their reviews of the patent, rather than waiting for "the crowd" to come to them.

16 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Search Techdirt
And now, a word from our Sponsors..



Popular Posts
Poll

Which Internet Concern Worries You The Most?

 

 

 

 

 

 


Add Techdirt RSS To Your Reader
rss Add Techdirt to your Bloglines
Add Techdirt to your Google Add Techdirt to your My Yahoo
Add Techdirt to your Netvibes Add Techdirt to your Newsgator
Subscribe to Techdirt's Daily Email Newsletter

Techdirt's Daily Email Newsletter

Older Stuff

Wednesday

4:46pm: UK Police Arresting People Just To Add To DNA Database? (18)
4:01pm: Funny How Those In Favor Of ACTA Are Against Treaty Providing More Access To Content For Vision Impaired (6)
3:15pm: Advertising As Content: Newspaper Raising Newsstand Prices For Thanksgiving Papers With Black Friday Ads (11)
2:14pm: Are Entertainment Industry Tactics Working? (50)
1:00pm: Photographer Compares Microstock Sites To Pollution And Drug Dealing (45)
11:48am: If Movie Piracy Is Really A Problem, It's Hollywood's Fault (77)
10:27am: If Google Visitors Are Worthless, It's Only Because Newspaper Execs Don't Know What They're Doing (37)
9:01am: Multitasking Is Our Main Activity (15)
7:33am: Greed vs. Due Diligence: Another Case Of Startup Fraud? (4)
6:01am: Anti-Piracy Group In Spain Fined For Bad Faith Actions Against File Sharing Systems (13)
3:55am: ABA Journal's Patent Application To Score Interview With USPTO Boss David Kappos (18)
1:44am: Can Universities Make Sure That Drugs Based On Their Research Are Licensed Reasonably? (19)

Tuesday

9:21pm: Companies Realizing That Content Is Advertising Via Web Series (12)
7:01pm: Could You Prove That The Government Was Watching You Illegally? (38)
4:56pm: Reuters, AP Refuse To Cover Cricket Matches Over Restrictive Press Accreditation Rules (21)
3:21pm: Comparing File Sharing To Payola: Could Have Had That Promotion For Free (34)
1:56pm: Jury Says Fictional Character Can Be Libelous (28)
12:44pm: Spam King Alan Ralsky Gets Four Years In Jail (28)
11:39am: Publishers Getting The Wrong Message Over eBook Piracy (39)
10:28am: Calling For An Independent Invention Defense In Patents (27)
9:12am: Microsoft Tries To Silence Revelation Of Bing Cashback Flaws; Leads To Revelation Of Other Problems (43)
8:03am: Don't Blame Facebook For Some Kids Beating Up Another Student (61)
6:46am: Hulu Telling Sites To Stop Embedding So Much (44)
5:00am: Once Again, If The Gov't Has Data, It Will Be Abused (42)
2:53am: As Expected, Social Networking Generation Running For Office Face Their Permanent Record Online (32)
12:55am: IMAX Sues Cinemark For Building Competing System... While Being An IMAX Customer (14)

Monday

10:26pm: Filmmaker Allowed To Use The Name Rin Tin Tin To Describe Rin Tin Tin (6)
8:25pm: Senators Begin Questioning ACTA Secrecy (32)
6:34pm: Brazil E-Voting Machines Not Hacked... But Van Eck Phreaking Allowed Hacker To Record Votes (15)
5:08pm: FCC Doesn't Think The Lack Of Competition Is A Major Barrier To Broadband? (36)
More arrow
Quick Links
Close
E-mail It