Congress Now Pushing 'Bring Back The Patent Trolls' Bill

from the oh-come-on dept

Back in April we warned about a truly terrible plan by some in Congress to obliterate the last few years of the Supreme Court fixing our broken patent system, and flinging the doors wide open to patenting genes, medical diagnostics, and software (all of which the Supreme Court has mostly rejected as abusive and monopolizing nature). One had hoped that after having explained to them how disastrous such a bill would be, that its backers might think carefully in crafting the final bill. Instead, Senators Tom Tillis and Chris Coons, along with Reps. Hank Johnson and Steve Sivers instead decided to double down with a bill that would massively stifle innovation.

They claim it's to "restore predictability and stability" in our patent system, but that's laughable. It is to massively increase the universe of patent-eligibility to include a wide range of things that almost anyone who understands innovation would consider it insane to allow patents to restrict. It would literally obliterate the three key Supreme Court cases that rejected patents on genes, medical diagnostics, and most software, and open the door to patenting "laws of nature," "abstract ideas" and "natural phenomenon." Really. It specifically says that:

No implicit or other judicially created exceptions to subject matter eligibility, including “abstract ideas,” “laws of nature,” or “natural phenomena,” shall be used to determine patent eligibility under section 101, and all cases establishing or interpreting those exceptions to eligibility are hereby abrogated.

It would also bring us back to a world in which the default is everything is patentable:

The provisions of section 101 shall be construed in favor of eligibility.

No one doing actual innovation would support this. The only people who could possibly support this are patent lawyers and patent trolls. It will reopen the floodgates of bad patents and patent trolling, flooding the courts with bogus lawsuits on broad and vague patents against actual innovators. It is a dangerous bill that Congress must reject. We lived through nearly two decades of patent trolls destroying innovation while Congress twiddled its thumbs and did almost nothing to stop it. The Supreme Court finally stepped in (again and again and again) to stop the nonsense -- and now these elected officials want to bring us back to such a world?

Filed Under: chris coons, gene patents, hank johnson, inventions, medical diagnostics, originality, patent trolls, patents, section 101, software patents, steve sivers, supreme court, tom tillis


Reader Comments

The First Word

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    Mason Wheeler (profile), 29 May 2019 @ 12:07pm

    Jurisdiction fight!

    No implicit or other judicially created exceptions to subject matter eligibility, including “abstract ideas,” “laws of nature,” or “natural phenomena,” shall be used to determine patent eligibility under section 101, and all cases establishing or interpreting those exceptions to eligibility are hereby abrogated.

    Congress says to Supreme Court, "you can't do that." The appropriate response is for the Supreme Court to say to Congress, "oh yes we can" and strike down the law.

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

    • icon
      Gary (profile), 29 May 2019 @ 12:40pm

      Re: Jurisdiction fight!

      Do you think that is a process that could be completed in under ten years?
      Better to not pass the damn thing and writeup some legislation that reduces patent protection rather than increasing it.
      Fighting a law all the way to the Supreme Court is a lengthy and expensive prospect. In the meantime bad patents would continue to churn at an accelerated rate.

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

      • icon
        Mason Wheeler (profile), 29 May 2019 @ 1:38pm

        Re: Re: Jurisdiction fight!

        Do you think that is a process that could be completed in under ten years?

        Sure, why couldn't it be? We've had bad laws struck down quickly before.

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

    • icon
      James Burkhardt (profile), 29 May 2019 @ 2:23pm

      Re: Jurisdiction fight!

      Which largely they wont do. CUrrent rulings on patents are based not in the constitutionality of patents, but based in the statute of patents. This law amends that statute. It is unlikely the Supreme court will suddenly find a constitutional definition of patents that overrules the new statute.

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

      • icon
        Vermont IP Lawyer (profile), 29 May 2019 @ 3:18pm

        Re: Re: Jurisdiction fight!

        Mr. Burkhardt is exactly right about this--the issue is interpretation of the statute and not about the constitution. Until Congress speaks up, SCOTUS has a good deal of flexibility in interpreting statutory provisions that, arguably, are ambiguous. Once Congress eliminates the ambiguity, SCOTUS has very little flexibility. For comparison, consider when Congress increased the term of copyright (per lobbying by Disney to protect Mickey Mouse) and a case was brought by very sophisticated plaintiffs arguing that was unconstitutional--those plaintiffs lost.

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

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2019 @ 5:32pm

      Re: Jurisdiction fight!

      And not only do that tell them they can never do it again by law.

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

  • icon
    That Anonymous Coward (profile), 29 May 2019 @ 1:45pm

    Who wants to help me get a patent shoved through on running for an elected office & accepting money to pass laws favorable to those paying me??

    Considering what other patent trolls have earned we could bankrupt congress.

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

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2019 @ 2:28pm

      Re:

      This sounds like a really good idea. File an intent to patent with the PTO so that your name is in there first, and then submit the actual paperwork should the law ever be passed.

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2019 @ 2:07pm

    "natural phenomena" .... hmmmmmm

    I think I'll patent the fart.

    Of course I'll be willing to license this "natural phenomena" patent to anyone for a small annual fee, but if I ever catch someone infringing on my newfound intellectual property, I'll promptly sue the pants off of them.

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

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2019 @ 2:13pm

    At least it's currently only the rapelicans in the house pushing this travesty.

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

    • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2019 @ 2:44pm

      Re:

      Sorry, the pedos in the democratic party are also pushing this in the house and senate. There is a senator and house rep from both parties sponsoring this, try reading the article. Nice job on making this partisan though.

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

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2019 @ 3:07pm

      Re:

      Today, U.S. Senators Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Chris Coons (D-DE), Chair and Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Intellectual Property, and Representative Doug Collins (R-GA-9), Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, Hank Johnson (D-GA-4), Chairman of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Intellectual Property and the Courts, and Steve Stivers (R-OH-15) released a bipartisan, bicameral draft bill that would reform Section 101 of the Patent Act.

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2019 @ 2:13pm

    Follow the money.

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2019 @ 2:25pm

    What the fuck?

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2019 @ 2:27pm

    Dibs on the patent for the "abstract idea" of 0.

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2019 @ 3:09pm

    I still can't get over how insane this is.

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

  • identicon
    anon, 29 May 2019 @ 4:59pm

    I choose to patent gravity and sue the Earth for usage violations.

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

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2019 @ 6:53pm

      Re:

      Intelligent falling, not gravity, is what keeps you firmly planted on this planet.

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

      • icon
        That One Guy (profile), 30 May 2019 @ 2:29am

        Re: Re:

        Nonsense, everyone knows that it's thanks to the FSM that people don't float off into the air, as his noodlely appendages press everyone down as a demonstration of his love and blessing.

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2019 @ 5:17pm

    I propose that breathing be patented and a suit brought against the idiots who thought this was a good idea.

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2019 @ 9:24pm

    Would this even get through a divided congress? I suppose there might be enough lobbying dollars to buy a majority in both chambers, but either chamber could put a poison-pill rider on it.

    One scenario would be if they tie some of the legislation that's stuck behind threats of presidential veto, like the infrastructure bill or additional hurricane aid to Puerto Rico and other affected locales.

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

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2019 @ 11:21pm

    Masnick writes about this, now let's see what's written about the turds that pay his rent:

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/may/28/a-white-collar-sweatshop-google-assistant-c ontractors-allege-wage-theft

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

  • icon
    frank87 (profile), 29 May 2019 @ 11:44pm

    Chine

    Let's hope China is really blocked. Innovation could survive behind the trade war blockades.

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

  • identicon
    ryuugami, 30 May 2019 @ 12:08am

    Tom Tillis and Chris Coons, [...] Steve Sivers

    Well of course these people want to expand the IP laws. They're obviously Marvel characters.

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 30 May 2019 @ 5:17am

    i thought the whole point of the supreme court is its the final court
    of opinion in legal matters ,
    if it says patents on natural laws are bad or illegal
    congress cant just ignore it.
    Or make laws that make patents based on natural laws legal . for instance companys could get patents on basic medical tests or software that looks at medical data for certain patterns .the result could be the cost of medical care and insurance could rise in the us because patent trolls
    will be sueing hospitals .
    Theres many basic software process,s that have never been patented
    because they were used by all pc users years before software
    patents were allowed .

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

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 30 May 2019 @ 6:35am

      Re:

      It appears you are attempting to apply logic to an anti-logic group of people. These folk go out of their way to make the most illogical decisions possible, all for the LOLZ.

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

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    icon
    Vishwakarma Sangamam (profile), 30 May 2019 @ 5:31am

    Hi

    i will be There for you

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

  • icon
    lucidrenegade (profile), 30 May 2019 @ 7:20am

    Another confirmation that stupidity is bi-partisan.

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 30 May 2019 @ 9:23am

    101 jurisprudence deftly sidesteps the constitutional right to a jury trial. Restoring primacy to that right as is being proposed seems to me like a good thing.

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

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 30 May 2019 @ 12:41pm

      Re:

      So, you'd rather have the jury convened twice, once for determining the validity of the claims-in-suit (both with regard to 101/patentable-subject-matter and 102&103/novelty&nonobviousness) and the second time for asking if the defendant infringed the patent or not? Can the jury be convened multiple times within the course of a single trial proceeding?

      Or would you rather have everything lumped into one set of jury instructions, raising the spectre of seemingly illogical jury verdicts akin to some of the messes we've seen in other contexts in the past? (Imagine the same jury sitting both invalidating the patent and ruling that the defendant infringed upon the patent...)

      Never mind that you're trying to pull an elephant out of something that's not an elephant-sized hole here...if you wanted patent validity to be a jury decision, why not just have the bill come out and say so?

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

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 30 May 2019 @ 1:13pm

        Re: Re:

        ???

        101 has been deemed by courts as a question of law that is outside the province of juries, all the while ignoring that critical questions of fact must first be resolved. Hence, my mention of them deftly sidestepping juries altogether and why the proposed legislation may actually be helpful.

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

  • icon
    CrushU (profile), 30 May 2019 @ 9:26am

    Yeah, that's Tillis for you

    Yep. That's Sen. Thom Tillis for you. He's routinely voting terribly on basically every technology policy issue, and tends to vote badly for other issues in general as well. Essentially just follows the worst parts of the party line. Really would like to elect someone else...

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

  • icon
    Hugo S Cunningham (profile), 30 May 2019 @ 11:23am

    House Republicans used to be good guys

    In 2014, the Republican House sent a good patent-reform bill to the Democratic Senate. Judiciary Committee chairman Patrick Leahy expressed some interest, but further action was vetoed by Majority Leader Harry Reid. There were brief hopes for reform when Harry Reid lost the Senate in 2014, but Republican Senators quickly showed themselves just as worthless as Democratic Senators.

    The three public-interest leaders in the Republican House, Darrell Issa, Bob Goodlatte, and Lamar Smith, announced retirement in 2018 (along with 40 other Republicans), unable or unwilling to adapt to the intellect-free environment of Trump Republicanism.

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 30 May 2019 @ 1:20pm

    Ooh...

    I'm going to patent the following:
    Presidential lie-fest (open mouth, lie follows)
    Presidential Rage Tweeting
    Presidential Funds Embezzlement
    Presidential Corruption
    Presidential Obstruction of Justice
    Presidential Interference with investigations
    etc..

    and finally
    Presidential Breathing

    Then I can send cease and desist to someone for all of the above, or sue for hundreds of thousands of dollars for every breath they take.

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


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: I Invented Email
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.