EFF Worried About Patent Reform Re-Exam Process
from the for-good-reason dept
While I’m obviously a strong believer in the idea that our patent system is fundamentally broken, I’ve also made it clear that the current plans for patent reform have a lot of problems. While it will fix a few things, it will also make other parts much worse, and will lead to even more abuse of the system. It’s “reform” that’s designed to simply patch a few things that are seen as problems, rather than recognizing the core, fundamental problems with the system — and, thus, it will do little to help (and could hurt). The EFF, which supports this patent legislation generally, is complaining about another potential problem with the current reform package. As written, the patent reform effort would make it much more difficult for third parties to contest questionable patents in some cases. Basically, rather than allowing them to request a full patent re-exam, it will force third parties to use the newly created post-grant review system, which has some limitations. For example, it would mean that groups like the EFF would need to contest a patent within 12 months of it being issued. That’s a problem, because it often doesn’t become clear how problematic a patent is until much later. In fact, if this policy were in place, it would have made the EFF’s patent busting project impossible. From the very start of the patent system, it was supposed to only be used in the rarest of circumstances. With that in mind, it makes sense to make the process for getting rid of bad, unnecessary and dangerous patents as easy as possible. It’s unfortunate that the system has morphed into the exact opposite.
Filed Under: eff, patent reform, patent review, patents, re-exams
Companies: eff
Comments on “EFF Worried About Patent Reform Re-Exam Process”
Patent Everything.
I am going to patent water.
Patent Nothing
I am going to patent dehydrated water.
I’m going to patent facilitating the distribution and consumption of water electronically with a computer and other devices.
And then I can patent single click distribution and consumption of water electronically.
I'll be rich
I’m going to patent a process or method for steering legislation through the repeated application of financial inducements to select individuals in control of committees and offices that oversee and direct development and application of laws governing business and financial practices. Simultaneously, I’ll apply for a patent for a process or method by which an individual or group of individuals in a position of power may solicit or accept financial or other remuneration in exchange for directing or redirecting the creation or enforcement of legislation in order to benefit an individual, group, or business.
Then I will patent making discussion boards about patents pertaining to water.
Prior art
Yeah, there may be prior art, but how many senators, congressmen, lawyers, businessmen are going to come testify in a court that they have been using said methods and wish to continue and that my patents will cause them financial harm.
Seriously, some enterprising patent attorney or maybe the EFF should write this up a little better (more legal and less clear) and attempt to patent it. Wouldn’t that be a hoot if they succeeded.
Can I get a patent on combining Protons,neutrons and Electrons in different combinations? I think I start with 6 neutrons and 6 Protons in the center, circled by 6 electrons.
I love patents.
Coincidentally, there’s an article on the patent system on another site I read frequently. I immediately thought of you, Mike, after reading it. Although they use kinder words than you.
http://www.american.com/archive/2008/january-february-magazine-contents/patents-pending