RSS
US Patent Office Seeking 'Partnership' With Software Community, Hoping To 'Enhance Quality Of Software Patents'
from the is-that-a-want-ad? dept
In what looks sort of like a government dating ad, the US Patent Office has announced that it's seeking a "software partnership" with the software community, with the goal of "enhancing the quality of software-related patents." To translate: "please come to hear us speak, because we're kind of annoyed that basically everyone who works in software hates patents and thinks software patents are pure evil." This process is kicking off with some roundtable discussions in Silicon Valley and New York City. Unfortunately, the parameters for the roundtable seem fairly limited already:
For these initial roundtable events, this notice sets forth several topics to begin the Software Partnership discussion. The first topic relates to how to improve clarity of claim boundaries that define the scope of patent protection for claims that use functional language. The second topic requests that the public identify additional topics for future discussion by the Software Partnership. The third topic relates to a forthcoming Request for Comments on Preparation of Patent Applications and offers an opportunity for oral presentations on the Request for Comments at the Silicon Valley and New York City roundtable events.Those are important issues, but it shows where the USPTO is starting from, and it's not about taking a wider look at issues related to software patents, but looking for ways to patch up some of the symptoms of the larger problem. It's good that they're looking to have this discussion, but it seems like a better first step would be to really hold an open discussion first, to hear more of the concerns of software holders.
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
No faith
The PTO appears to have only one goal: to increase the number of patents and increase the rate at which they are approved. I submit that a better use of their time would be to reevaluate their purpose: they should be focussed on patent quality, not quantity.
I dream of a day when approval of a patent is actually a sign that the patent is likely to be valid.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No faith
http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/01/03/uspto-seeks-comment-on-software-patent-quality/id=32730/
Now go home illiterals! :)
Remember that the events are only for getting opinions and it is unlikely that it will actually get anything done. The thing we can hope for is that USPTO has gotten the ball rolling on collecting grassroots for rationalizing the system.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: No faith
Then I got to the bottom.. OOOh, patent attorney.. lol
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No faith
Not quite as bad as 1997's "To Help Our Customers Get Patents"; but let us recall that when you work from the predicate "patents == innovation", you arrive at conclusions like "more patents == good".
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: No faith
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: No faith
Does that mean the whole world ends up with your broken system. Please keep your bad ideas to your own country.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
dont be ridiculous. that would mean having someone at the patent office that had and used some sense!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
You stop getting in our way, and we will make software.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Enhance Quality?
A program is not an invention any more than an idea or a novel.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe they should start discussing why this is the case and how to back out of the mess that they helped create.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Add Your Comment